Hi Eike, I agree with Francis that I don't quite see the point for serializing an Exception, although I must admit that java.lang.Throwable is Serializable.
But then I agree that we should consider making DBObject or ErrorObject serializeable which then would apply to the entire object hierarchy. Regards Rainer Francis De Brabandere wrote: > from: Francis De Brabandere [mailto:[email protected]] > to: [email protected] > re: Re: Serialization of EmpireException > > Hi Eike, > > I see no reason for not making them Serializable. > > Rainer? > > Cheers, > Francis > > On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Eike Kettner <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > I was trying to serialize EmpireException but ran into an error. > > EmpireException is marked as Serializable (extending > RuntimeException) > > but it holds references to ErrorObject and ErrorType which are not > > serializable. Hence a NotSerializableException is thrown. > > > > When asking this, I like to ask whether there is a thought about > making > > some model objects like DBRowset DBTable etc serializable. Since most > or all > > DBXyz objects hold model information only it should be okay for them > to > > be serializable, imho? I use messaging and often Apache Wicket which > > both use serialization, that's why I'm asking this. (For example, I'd > > like to pass around where and order-by expressions). > > > > Kind Regards, > > Eike > > > > > > > > > > -- > http://www.somatik.be > Microsoft gives you windows, Linux gives you the whole house.
