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 WikiWizard (talk | contribs) at 00:28, 26 March 2008 (→Introduction paragraph: new section). 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.

Introduction paragraph

In the last sentence of the introduction paragraph, the statement "If none of these tests pass, the method throws NotSerializableException." is made. My knowledge of java isn't that strong, but should it be "If any of these tests fail, the method throws NotSerializableException."?

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Marker_interface_pattern&oldid=200943231"