CODEWITHSUNDEEP
javaserialization
user871611
user871611

Reputation: 3462

Is this constructor change still Java Object Serialization compatible?

I couldn't figure out if this change in the constructor is still (de)serialization compatible in Java Object Serialization. These classes are used as http-session objects.

Current code

import com.foo.FooDataObject;

public class Foo extends FooBase {

  public Foo(final FooDataObject fooDataObject) {
    super(fooDataObject.getFoo);
  }
}

public abstract class FooBase implements Serializable {

  private final String foo;

  public FooBase(final String foo) {
    this.foo = foo;
  }

  public String getFoo() {
    return foo;
  }
}

Change (the class of the constructor parameter changed):

import com.foo.wherever.FooDO;

public class Foo extends FooBase {

  public Foo(final FooDO fooDO) {
    super(fooDO.getFoo);
  }
}

Upvotes: 0

Views: 163

Answers (1)

Petar Bivolarski
Petar Bivolarski

Reputation: 1767

Yes, it should be. You are simply changing the type of the parameter, but still using the same way of instance construction - via constructor with arguments.

See more of the available ways for Jackson deserialization (if you use this framework) here.

Upvotes: 1

Related Questions