Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 16949 invoked from network); 30 May 2006 17:58:55 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 30 May 2006 17:58:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 88714 invoked by uid 500); 30 May 2006 17:58:54 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 88328 invoked by uid 500); 30 May 2006 17:58:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list java-dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 88316 invoked by uid 99); 30 May 2006 17:58:52 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 30 May 2006 10:58:52 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [209.86.89.69] (HELO elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net) (209.86.89.69) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 30 May 2006 10:58:51 -0700 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=ix.netcom.com; b=Nh10Nbb1tK/DOCDD3f77imDg1SjmCfHNAQZl50+b5M4+QKpRRuAVk8rpkqJrW4AA; h=Received:Reply-To:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:Thread-Index:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [66.245.135.50] (helo=ENGELSSERVER) by elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Fl8U7-0007SJ-H6 for java-dev@lucene.apache.org; Tue, 30 May 2006 13:58:27 -0400 Reply-To: From: "Robert Engels" To: Subject: RE: Lucene and Java 1.5 Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 12:58:28 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Thread-Index: AcaEEbtmL2Y0z1mtTHu/Aq4GqzuuFAAANq6Q In-Reply-To: Message-ID: X-ELNK-Trace: 33cbdd8ed9881ca8776432462e451d7bd15d05d9470ff7109086c918e3593027a7ab4ef70073ec9f350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 66.245.135.50 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N The ThreadLocal is a class library change, so no it would not apply here. -----Original Message----- From: Chris Hostetter [mailto:hossman_lucene@fucit.org] Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 12:51 PM To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Lucene and Java 1.5 : Agreed. But, I have not heard one compelling argument for the JDK 5 for : core. (JVM certainly) Off the top of my head... * Generics for cleaner more type safe APIs * Varargs for cleaner APIs * Concurrency Libraries, in particular the new j.u.concurrent.locks package ...someone also mentioned ThreadLocal improvements -- but I'm not sure if that's a JVM issue or a language change. -Hoss --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org