Defender-methods: A chance to finally retrofit Cloneable with clone method?
mcnepp02 at googlemail.com
Tue Aug 9 22:50:37 PDT 2011
Am 08.08.2011 20:07, schrieb Joe Darcy:
> There is a long, sad story behind why Cloneable is only a marker
> interface; IIRC, at least some of that story is recounted in "Effective
All that I ever read about the history of Cloneable said it was a
mistake not to include the clone() method in the interface and that it
could not be retrofitted compatibly.
(See, for example, the bug:
Well, now (with defender methods) we can retrofit it!
> In any case, I do not expect defenders to be used to retrofit a clone
> method to Cloneable.
I don't get the intention of that sentence. Do you expect other means to
be used to retrofit a clone method?
Or do you not expect Cloneable ever to be fixed? Or is it a hint about
what you would endorse or not endorse?
More information about the coin-dev