Prevent custom JsonElement subclasses#1689
Closed
Marcono1234 wants to merge 1 commit into
Closed
Conversation
Collaborator
|
Yeah, we didn't envision JsonElement to be subclassed. However, at this point in time, it will be a backward incompatible change, and not worth making. |
Contributor
Author
|
Edit: Nevermind, creating custom subclasses might not actually be that problematic because the default type adapter only calls the |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Adds a package-private constructor to JsonElement to prevent custom subclasses. JsonElement models the JSON data types so there should probably be no need for custom subclasses because the existing JsonElement subclasses cover all of them. Additionally custom subclasses would cause issues during (de-)serialization because the default type adapter does not support them.
However, maybe there are use cases (in unit tests?) where custom subclasses are desired?
Would it be better to only deprecate the public constructor for now?