Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
Accoriding to javadoc,
public class AtomicInteger extends Number implements java.io.Serializable {
// code for class
}
But,
public abstract class Number implements java.io.Serializable {
//code for class
}
If Number class already implements java.io.Serializable then why do AtomicInteger implements it again?
Edit: Does Serializable being a marker interface makes any difference in this context?
Just to document it more clearly. Same situation with the abstract collection base classes.
Could also have been a mistake initially (that is now carried forward for consistency’s sake).