Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Only avoid Records fields detection for deserialization #3894
Only avoid Records fields detection for deserialization #3894
Changes from all commits
6777448
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmmm. I don't think this should be done, even if it handles this particular problem, it seems like a hack...
But let me think about this bit more.
I guess the idea is that doing this would "pull in" getters.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok, thank you @yihtserns -- it's not so much for pulling in getters, but for alternate visibility.
I think this is necessary, then. I am bit worried about possible side-effects of doing this (wrt forcing access to
Field
s but since it's only for serialization perhaps it's not a problem).There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is the problem in #3897 taken into account, or affected by this PR? Hope not 🥲
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've did test this against that issue, the other day - apparently they're unrelated. 😮💨
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@yihtserns Great! ✌🏼✌🏼
If you have the test code used, maybe we can merge it to 2.15, under failing?
If you don't have time for it, you can just share it here and I can include it in #3899