commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org>
Subject Re: [Math] Java version
Date Thu, 15 Jan 2015 16:09:30 GMT
On Thu, 15 Jan 2015 09:32:25 -0500, Hank Grabowski wrote:
> If you are referring to default functions on interfaces, it's not 
> going to
> be like multiple inheritance C++ style.  Their rationale is to help 
> for
> backwards compatibility with upgraded interfaces that add methods.
> Obviously it could be used to intentionally provide default methods 
> from
> the very beginning, but since I've never designed an interface with 
> that
> construct in mind I'm personally going to tread lightly with that 
> idea.
> Thankfully, as far as I know, if two interfaces have a default method 
> with
> the same signature then the code won't compile versus just "guessing" 
> which
> one you meant.
>
> If the real crux is lambda expressions have we thought about doing
> something with either Retrolambda (back porter) or  LambdaJ (Google's
> Apache 2.0 licensed pre-Java 8 lambda library)?

For good or bad (another discussion), CM does not depend on any 
external
libraries, so as long as a feature is not part of the language, we 
cannot
experiment with it to code new features.

Once the features are in the language, it's a completely different 
matter,
IMHO: keeping them out of our development toolbox for too long may 
alienate
would-be contributors.
We cannot at the same time forbid usage of the newer features, and 
point
that nobody has come up with such usage.  It takes experimentation to
arrive at good usage; it's natural that people will not spend time 
doing
it if they know that the implementation will never make it to the
repository.


Best regards,
Gilles

>
> On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 7:54 AM, Evan Ward <evan.ward@nrl.navy.mil> 
> wrote:
>
>> From an API perspective we can design a functional programming API 
>> in
>> Java 7, it will just be more verbose than in Java 8. One unique 
>> feature
>> that Java 8 does bring is multiple inheritance. Now that interfaces 
>> can
>> have method implementations classes can inherit methods from 
>> multiple
>> super classes. At this point I'm not sure how we would use this 
>> feature
>> as API designers, but it is another tool in the tool box.
>>
>> I think 7 or 8 would be a good choice.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Evan
>>
>> On 01/14/2015 11:20 PM, Silviu Burcea wrote:
>> > I think Rebel Labs or Plumbr have some metrics about JDK usage.
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 10:21 PM, Hank Grabowski <
>> hank@applieddefense.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Java 8 has only been out for less than a year.  There is still a 
>> sizable
>> >> percentage of groups that have not converted up to Java 8 for 
>> myriad
>> >> reasons.  While I was surprised that we are requiring backwards
>> >> compatibility with the ten year old Java 5 I think jumping all 
>> the way
>> to
>> >> requiring Java 8 may be a bit too much of a stretch.  I would 
>> vote for a
>> >> minimum required version of Java 7 with the ability to run in 
>> Java 8.  I
>> >> wish I could find metrics to quantify the penetration of each of 
>> the
>> JDKs,
>> >> but my gut says Java 7 would a reasonable cutoff.
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 8:31 PM, Gilles 
>> <gilles@harfang.homelinux.org>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Raising this issue once again.
>> >>>>> Are we going to upgrade the requirement for the next major 
>> release?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>  [ ] Java 5
>> >>>>>  [ ] Java 6
>> >>>>>  [ ] Java 7
>> >>>>>  [ ] Java 8
>> >>>>>  [ ] Java 9
>> >>>>>
>> >>> Counts up to now:
>> >>>
>> >>> Java 7      -> 2
>> >>> Java 7 or 8 -> 2
>> >>> Java 8      -> 2
>> >>>
>> >>> Any more opionions?
>> >>>
>> >>> Gilles


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


Mime
View raw message