Jump to content

Talk:Marker interface pattern

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 68.236.38.125 (talk) at 13:01, 24 January 2007. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Maybe a bit offtopic, but I do not see the point having the clone() method in Object and a seperate interface making a call to clone "valid". Where is the advantage over letting Clonable have (is this correct english?) a method clone() (making this a non-marker interface) or is this for historical reasons? :) A better example for a marker interface would be appreciated.

I agree. It's exactly what I thought when I read the article. Alf Boggis (talk) 14:26, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's because it isn't why Cloneable exists. Nowhere do the docs say that Cloneable "indicates that the cloning functionality is actually supported in a proper manner". In fact, they're very specific about why Cloneable is used, and that it gives specific information to Object.clone().

Will be editing the article once I figure out Wikipedia's markup (rhetorical question: why do all wikis have a different set of codes?). Serializable is a better example of a marker interface, because Java provides multiple ways to write an object.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Marker_interface_pattern&oldid=102892903"