commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris <>
Subject Re: [math] Annotations
Date Mon, 10 Feb 2014 16:44:18 GMT
Hi Thomas,

If this is only for documentary purposes, it seems a bit strange in my
mind. Wouldn't a comment at the header serve the same purpose?


On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 7:03 AM, luc <> wrote:

> Le 2014-02-10 10:16, Thomas Neidhart a écrit :
>> Hi,
> Hi Thomas,
>> this is an issue I was thinking about for some time now, and it is quite
>> some recurrent theme that we face in Commons.
>> Considering our release practice, it is actually quite hard to come up
>> with
>> new features as the API is more or less fixed once it has been included.
>> Ideally, this could or should be handled with alpha/beta releases were we
>> gather feedback on a new API, but due to limited resources this does not
>> seem feasible. From experience in Math we also see that when we want to
>> extend an existing API for further uses, it is sometimes impossible to be
>> backwards compatible simply because the original API did not foresee such
>> things, which is quite normal I guess.
>> Thus, I would like to discuss another approach. Add certain annotations to
>> the code that clearly mark the mark the current state of a class/type and
>> which allows us to break compatibility for such classes even in minor
>> releases.
> Would these annotations only be used as documentation or would there be
> some
> tools for users?
> Luc
>> As a first step I would foresee the following annotations:
>>  * Internal: Only for internal use, no guarantee about BC or may even be
>> removed without warning
>>  * Beta: New API, may be changed in minor releases after gathering
>> feedback
>> from the community
>> Additionally, I would like to introduce also the annotations from the
>> jcip (
>> I do not know if we can add them as dependency, but we could
>> also add them ourselves. IMO this would be of great benefit to our users
>> if
>> it is clear if a certain class is Immutable, ThreadSafe or Not and one
>> does
>> not have to analyze the source code to assert him/herself.
>> I created a ticket for this, and started with two annotations so far:
>> So what do you think about that?
>> Thomas
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:


  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message