I've been getting this in Eclipse WTP forever. I ignored it for a while, using quick fix is sort of bad because (if I understand correctly) the point of a serialVersionUID is to create a number that maps to the class's signature so that when de-serializing, a recipient will know if the serialized version of the class is compatible with what it is looking for. Why I think this is bad? Well, if I start working I'll see this warning right away and "quick fix" it. Then, I'll start coding, which may or may not include changing the classes methods. I have to remember at this point to change the serialVersionUID. It's nice that Eclipse warns that no serialVersionUID exists, but it's sort of counter-productive IMO.
-Wes On 9/6/07, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So, for complicated reasons, I'm trying to use Eclipse more these days. > > Something it likes to do is nag that "The serializable class > $classname does not declare a static final serialVersionUID field of > type long". > > Since the Actions are serializable, we get this alot :) > > A seemingly good explanation of the message is here: > > * http://forum.java.sun.com/thread.jspa?threadID=581654&messageID=3501336 > > Do we want to go ahead and add the field and silence the nag? Or just > turn it off in our Eclipse IDEs? Or add the "@SupressWarnings" > annotations? Otherwise, it's hard to tell if we've addressed any other > warnings. > > If we were to add it and use the "quick fix", should we "add a default > serial ID" or "add generated serial ID"? > > -Ted. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Wesley Wannemacher President, Head Engineer/Consultant WanTii, Inc. http://www.wantii.com
