lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bernhard Messer <bmes...@apache.org>
Subject Re: jdk 1.3 versus jdk 1.4
Date Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:15:03 GMT

>On Monday 15 November 2004 13:47, Bernhard Messer wrote:
>  
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>since the last changes in lucene, we are not longer backward compatible
>>with jdk 1.3. All the pure guys, running IBM WebSphere 4.x with IBM JDK
>>1.3, lost their chances to run lucene newer than version 1.4.2.
>>Especially in huge companies, where it is not so trivial to upgrade to a
>>new java version, this could reduce the acceptance for lucene
>>
>>There are two major reasons for loosing the compatibility:
>>    
>>
>...
>  
>
>> - several code parts like:
>>    ...
>>    catch (ClassNotFoundException e) {
>>      throw new RuntimeException(e);
>>    }
>>    ...
>>;-) The second problem could be solved easily using the string constructor
>>in java.lang.RuntimeException which is available since 1.0.
>>At least we have to document it somehow. There is a chapter "What are
>>Lucene system requirements" in the faq. Is this an ideal place to
>>document it.
>>
>>I'd like to make the changes for being backward compatible as far as
>>possible. Does anybody disagree ?
>>    
>>
>
>It is also possible to solve this second problem in a way that both allows 
>Lucene code to use proper Exception nesting, if available (running on 1.4+), 
>and omit it if not (1.3). This can be done using bit of Reflection.
>
>The reason this is sometimes useful is that knowledge about nested exception 
>is very useful for debugging; especially line numbers.
> (in my case I use it to keep Woodstox XML-parser 1.2 compatible, while using 
>LinkedHashMap, and nested exceptions, if possible)
>
>The solution is not a one-liner though (if someone is interested, let me know 
>and I can point you to the source code), so maybe it's easier to just "dumb 
>it down" to using String constructor. But I just thought I'll mention that it 
>can be completely resolved if it seems worthwhile. :-)
>  
>
you're right, i like the idea creating a nested exception. For the 
particular case, it would be enough to create a NestedRuntimeException 
which works under both JVM's.

bernhard

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


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