[ImageJ-devel] cell-serialisation

[Tobias Pietzsch]

Hi Mark

Ok, if it doesn't harm performance it's fine with me. I had missed the note in the merge commit...

best regards,
Tobias

On Jul 8, 2013, at 3:46 PM, Mark Hiner <hiner at wisc.edu> wrote:

> Hi Tobias,
> 
> The SCIFIOCell class needs to be serializable to allow the library we're using to persist opened cells to disk, and thus its superclass(es) needs to be serializable with non-final fields. 
> 
> The only potential alternative I can think of would be to fully duplicate AbstractCell's fields and logic in SCIFIOCell... but that would still require the ArrayDataAccess to be serializable (do you see that as a potential problem, or only AbstractCell?).
> 
> In the merge commit I mentioned we ran the PerformanceBenchmark with/without implementing Serializable and saw no difference. We thought that was sufficient for merging the changes, but I'm sorry if we circumvented discussion.
> 
> If there are other tests you'd like to see run, or would like me to investigate duplicating AbstractCell's code, let me know.
> 
> Thanks,
> Mark
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Tobias Pietzsch <pietzsch at mpi-cbg.de> wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> we just noticed the merge of the cell-serialization branch, that makes AbstractCell Serializable and therefore final field non-final.
> Actually Stephan Saalfeld noticed, I would have missed it probably. It would be nice if such changes could be discussed before they are merged to master.
> Did you do any tests to evaluate the performance impact of un-finalizing the fields.
> What is this needed for and are there other alternatives to achieve it instead of making AbstractCell Serializable.
> 
> best regards,
> Tobias
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://imagej.net/pipermail/imagej-devel/attachments/20130710/f30489b8/attachment.html>