Comments on: Persisting of unknown (or new) types with XPO http://www.sturmnet.org/blog/archives/2005/02/10/xpo-value-converters/ General musings and programming stuff Tue, 06 Jan 2009 15:49:51 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1.3 by: Oliver Sturm’s weblog - Nullable types in XPO without .NET 2 http://www.sturmnet.org/blog/archives/2005/02/10/xpo-value-converters/#comment-51 Tue, 15 Mar 2005 14:17:50 +0000 http://www.sturmnet.org/blog/archives/2005/02/10/xpo-value-converters/#comment-51 [...] under: Programming, .NET, XPO — Oliver Sturm @ 1:45 pm - 32 minutes ago In a previous article, I showed how nullable types, as implemented in version 2 [...] […] under: Programming, .NET, XPO — Oliver Sturm @ 1:45 pm - 32 minutes ago In a previous article, I showed how nullable types, as implemented in version 2 […]

]]> by: Kenneth Ellested http://www.sturmnet.org/blog/archives/2005/02/10/xpo-value-converters/#comment-18 Tue, 15 Feb 2005 12:26:17 +0000 http://www.sturmnet.org/blog/archives/2005/02/10/xpo-value-converters/#comment-18 I guess I have confused something then. I just remember an issue, trying to serialize some objects back in time when .net was initially released. It wasn't possible without using the binary formatter. Maybe it had something to do with the object graph. Anyway, I haven't had any use for it since, so until now I just believed that the binary formatter was capable of serializing any objects. Maybe I also confused it with the ISerializable interface. I guess I have confused something then. I just remember an issue, trying to serialize some
objects back in time when .net was initially released. It wasn’t possible without using the
binary formatter. Maybe it had something to do with the object graph. Anyway, I haven’t had any
use for it since, so until now I just believed that the binary formatter was capable of
serializing any objects. Maybe I also confused it with the ISerializable interface.

]]> by: Oliver Sturm http://www.sturmnet.org/blog/archives/2005/02/10/xpo-value-converters/#comment-16 Thu, 10 Feb 2005 13:43:38 +0000 http://www.sturmnet.org/blog/archives/2005/02/10/xpo-value-converters/#comment-16 I haven't tried this right now, but <a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/cpref/html/frlrfsystemserializableattributeclasstopic.asp">this page in MSDN</a> certainly suggests differently. Where have you heard or seen that the BinaryFormatter can serialize objects without the SerializableAttribute? Of course, using the binary format has its advantages because the stored data will be more compact and I guess the serialization process will probably be faster, too. But I usually prefer to use text (xml) based formats these days because memory and processing power aren't the scarce resources they used to be. Plus, I can always look into the database with any tool and - more or less - read what's in the field if it's in SOAP format. I haven’t tried this right now, but this page in MSDN certainly suggests differently. Where have you heard or seen that the BinaryFormatter can serialize objects without the SerializableAttribute?

Of course, using the binary format has its advantages because the stored data will be more compact and I guess the serialization process will probably be faster, too. But I usually prefer to use text (xml) based formats these days because memory and processing power aren’t the scarce resources they used to be. Plus, I can always look into the database with any tool and - more or less - read what’s in the field if it’s in SOAP format.

]]> by: Kenneth Ellested http://www.sturmnet.org/blog/archives/2005/02/10/xpo-value-converters/#comment-15 Thu, 10 Feb 2005 13:23:37 +0000 http://www.sturmnet.org/blog/archives/2005/02/10/xpo-value-converters/#comment-15 Very nice - how about trying this with the BinaryFormatter. AFAIK it should take any object, serializeable or not. Very nice - how about trying this with the BinaryFormatter.
AFAIK it should take any object, serializeable or not.

]]>