atom feed17 messages in org.jdom.jdom-interestRe: [jdom-interest] Java 5 planning
FromSent OnAttachments
Jason HunterMar 4, 2008 1:39 pm 
Victor ToniMar 4, 2008 2:55 pm 
RolfMar 4, 2008 5:58 pm 
Mattias JiderhamnMar 4, 2008 11:38 pm 
Mattias JiderhamnMar 4, 2008 11:49 pm 
Michael KayMar 5, 2008 1:36 am 
Joe BowbeerMar 5, 2008 5:05 am 
Victor ToniMar 5, 2008 5:24 am 
Michael KayMar 5, 2008 7:15 am 
Mattias JiderhamnMar 6, 2008 12:04 am 
Jason HunterMar 8, 2008 12:43 am 
Michael KayMar 8, 2008 1:58 am 
Jason HunterMar 8, 2008 2:49 am 
Michael KayMar 8, 2008 9:49 am 
Timothy MarcMar 8, 2008 12:26 pm 
Mattias JiderhamnMar 12, 2008 2:03 am 
Tatu SalorantaMar 12, 2008 9:41 am 
Subject:Re: [jdom-interest] Java 5 planning
From:Tatu Saloranta (cowt@yahoo.com)
Date:Mar 12, 2008 9:41:55 am
List:org.jdom.jdom-interest

--- Mattias Jiderhamn <mj-l@expertsystems.se> wrote:

...

more than 3 years now. If a user notices the lack of generics support they may think "Hey, this piece of software probably haven't been maintained in years, so I better look for something newer that's still being maintained". (And I believe most people will not bother checking the mailing list)

Color me snobby elitist, but I'm not sure I would mind losing such potential users... Realistically though I think it's all about momentum and inertia: big user bases tend to persist (witness popularity of, say, Axis 1 and Struts 1). Most popular translates to "best 'cause everyone's using it" in human mind.

It's ok to want genericsification "just because", I just don't think there are particularly strong or compelling reasons either way.

-+ Tatu +-