lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From DM Smith <dmsmith...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Lucene and Java 1.5
Date Tue, 30 May 2006 17:13:02 GMT
What features should be encouraged? discouraged? not allowed?

For example, should annotations be used where possible? or is it purely 
optional?

What about "static import"? I find that DoHicky.WHATS_IT a bit more 
revealing than WHATS_IT, as it tells me its origin.

Should enhanced for loops be used where possible? Does that mean that 
existing loops should change? If not, does the mix of old loop and new 
loop create a point of confusion or a maintenance problem?

Should autoboxing/unboxing be used? Under what circumstances is the 
performance hit acceptable.

What have other projects done? Can we learn from their experiences?

Chris Hostetter wrote:
> : important new facilities. Repeating my earlier question, why should a
> : platform that is 2 years behind for java expect to be at the latest and
> : greatest level for lucene? I'd propose 2.0 (+ branched patches) be the
> : 1.4 release distribution, with 2.1 free to move up to 1.5.
>
> I would ammend that proposal slightly...
>
> 1a) Lucene Core 2.0.* releases garuntee java1.4 compatibility
> 1b) Lucene Contrib modules in 2.0.* releases are free to require any java
>     version they choose.
>
> 2a) Lucene Core 2.1.* release garuntee java1.5 compatibility.
> 2b) Lucene Contrib modules in 2.1.* releases are free to require any java
>     version they choose.
>
> -Hoss

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


Mime
View raw message