I glanced, and I couldn't find any instance where the deserialized Vector is actually cast to a concrete subclass. That's good. It suggests just about nothing is written to depend on a particular implementation.
Adding a generic type means all "VectorWritable" become "VectorWritable<Vector>" by default and that could be more mess than it's worth. I'm leaning towards not adding that generic type. Sean On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 9:48 PM, Ted Dunning <[email protected]> wrote: > Much better answer. I don't think it is abuse at all ... generics are there > to save explicit casts. > > Keeping the final in place is also good.
