Mailing-List: contact dev-help@ant.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Ant Developers List" <dev@ant.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of peter.kitt.reilly@gmail.com
 designates 72.14.202.181 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=PhyHLLQ985/qeIZHgXt9/gylqVTV7q8+X7lqTEGXHXAC84Ps6Ykede0SaKJjLA2mt+YtCHq8Hz28GK6QM+LRNdBLexxEX9rJexTrmIIVU4LibCdRpKAFIUS8GJQzGb1ysKuR35KXRueioJ6kIHRPdJL9ttq2ddIXkfjpGlz7Eq0=
Message-ID: <dffc72020801160239j69063295r873d3c6801f11cc3@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 10:39:49 +0000
From: "Peter Reilly" <peter.kitt.reilly@gmail.com>
To: "Ant Developers List" <dev@ant.apache.org>
Subject: Re: AW: ant java versions
In-Reply-To: <478DDC4E.8040003@apache.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <478C897C.7070304@apache.org> <y1ulk6rmke0.fsf@v30161.1blu.de>
	 <EF39D77A486C234B9D9933091CE6D21E020F893E@z011034.bk.fin.local>
	 <478CA98D.2090101@apache.org>
	 <EF39D77A486C234B9D9933091CE6D21E020F8941@z011034.bk.fin.local>
	 <dffc72020801150739u738782e0td35ef1059e1bceaa@mail.gmail.com>
	 <478DDC4E.8040003@apache.org>

On Jan 16, 2008 10:28 AM, Steve Loughran <stevel@apache.org> wrote:
> Peter Reilly wrote:
>
> > I do not think we should do this.
> > As far as I know, there is no super compelling reason to make ant only
> > work on java 1.4 +,
>
>
> I was curious as it is a lot easier to do relative URLs with the
> java.net.URI class, which is java 1.4+ only
>
> > java5, on the other hand....
>
> we switched to java5 @ Work, primarily because once you read all the
> (wonderful) papers on the Java Memory Model, you can't trust the JVM's
> memory accesses to volatile keyworded data in a multithreaded app.
>
> It does offer lots of advantages
>   -new collections
>   -iterators
>   -ability to have subclasses return subtypes on overridden methods
>   -concurrency API
>
> That's before you worry about annotations.
>
> I think if we made a jump to java5 for Ant1.8 we'd upset all the java1.4
> users out there (and there are still a lot -I can see that for
> discussons on testng-users mailing list, people who annotations in
> javadoc. However, I can also see that we'd want to move to java 5
> eventually, and we need to move from java1.3 to 1.4 first. So having a
> move from java1.3 for java 1.8 would seem a first a step.

There are a woe-full amount of java 1.3 users as well..

Peter

>
>
>
> --
> Steve Loughran                  http://www.1060.org/blogxter/publish/5
> Author: Ant in Action           http://antbook.org/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org