Talk:Clone (Java method)

Java Stub‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Java, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Java on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JavaWikipedia:WikiProject JavaTemplate:WikiProject JavaJava
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Please keep adverts for your book out of the article unless you're using it as a direct reference. 142.232.8.200 (talk) 04:19, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it a bit funny to first delete a reference ("shameless advert") and then to set a "citation needed" tag? ;-)

I do not know the "crappy book", but any references reviewing the "clone or copy constructor" debate should be welcome. I have added a link to Java Practices, but truly there are other sources.--Gerd-HH (talk) 08:36, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other Languages and Frameworks

Clone() appears in other languages too, like the CLS languages (C#, VB.NET, IronPython, etc under System.IClonable). Don't they get a mention? W3bbo (talk) 19:56, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

clone is obsolete?

I am removing the obsolete statement, and the reference to some Java site (which has incorrect statements, e.g. about having to implement clone in deriving classes). Faustus (talk) 15:29, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clone is fast, Serializable is slow.

At the end of the article it mentions using Serializable should be almost as fast as clone. This is crazy. Serializable is very slow. See "java-built-in" in these benchmarks: http://wiki.github.com/eishay/jvm-serializers/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by N4te (talk • contribs) 03:22, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]