Re: [jdom-interest] jdom 2.0 with generics - Brenner, Mike - org.jdom.jdom-interest

25 messages in org.jdom.jdom-interestRe: [jdom-interest] jdom 2.0 with gen...

From	Sent On	Attachments
Noel Grandin	Jul 21, 2011 6:00 am
Thomas Scheffler	Jul 21, 2011 7:08 am
J Dalton	Jul 21, 2011 8:04 am
Olivier Jaquemet	Jul 21, 2011 8:23 am
Brenner, Mike	Jul 21, 2011 8:37 am
Paul Libbrecht	Jul 21, 2011 8:50 am
Bob Jacobsen	Jul 21, 2011 9:23 am
Alves, Licinio S CIV NUWC NWPT	Jul 21, 2011 2:06 pm
Rolf Lear	Jul 21, 2011 4:18 pm
Michael Kay	Jul 21, 2011 4:29 pm
Rolf Lear	Jul 21, 2011 4:55 pm
Noel Grandin	Jul 22, 2011 6:25 am
Rolf Lear	Jul 22, 2011 8:43 am
Jason Hunter	Jul 22, 2011 1:33 pm
Rolf Lear	Jul 22, 2011 2:08 pm
Noel Grandin	Jul 25, 2011 12:57 am
Leigh L Klotz Jr	Jul 28, 2011 11:16 am	.java, .java, .java
Jason Hunter	Aug 7, 2011 6:32 pm
Brad Cox	Aug 8, 2011 4:10 am
jdom	Aug 8, 2011 5:52 am
Rolf	Aug 8, 2011 6:12 am
Rolf	Aug 8, 2011 7:12 am
Joe Bowbeer	Aug 8, 2011 9:22 am
Brad Cox	Aug 10, 2011 3:57 pm
Brad Cox	Aug 10, 2011 4:17 pm

Subject:	Re: [jdom-interest] jdom 2.0 with generics
From:	Brenner, Mike (mik...@mitre.org)
Date:	Jul 21, 2011 8:37:01 am
List:	org.jdom.jdom-interest

I agree -- go forward with backwards compatibility.

-----Original Message----- From: jdom...@jdom.org [mailto:jdom...@jdom.org] On
Behalf Of Olivier Jaquemet Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 11:24 AM To: J Dalton Cc: Thomas Scheffler; jdom...@jdom.org Subject: Re: [jdom-interest] jdom 2.0 with generics

To that regard, I like the approach taken by several libraries when making important change with backward compatibility, specially for Generics. They change the package name ! That way, the only thing required for the developper wanting to use the new version is a simple modification of the import directive + the generics modification is required. And code using the older library can be left untouched.

For example, apache commons lang 3.0 which has been release two days ago is using this approach. import org.apache.commons.lang -> import org.apache.commons.lang3 It allows older version of the library to seat next to the new one without any glitches.

So +1 for JDom 2 with generics with a package name change.

On 21/07/2011 17:05, J Dalton wrote:

If it breaks backward compatibility, surely those who do not want to (or are unable to) change their code could continue to use the earlier versions.

That JDOM doesn't use generics has unfortunately become an argument against using JDOM.

2011/7/21 Thomas Scheffler<thom...@uni-jena.de>:

Am 21.07.2011 15:01, schrieb Noel Grandin:

Would there be any interest in doing a JDOM 2.0 targeting java 1.5+, but changing return types to use generics?

I'd be happy to produce some patches, they're pretty straightforward.

And I know I'd appreciate cleaning up some of code with better type checking.

Hi,

this topic has been around some time now. And the main concern was that this change would break backward compatibility. Beside that using generics would be great, as JAVA 5 itself is unsupported since 2009 now.

So if current code runs without changes: +1 from me.

regards,

	Start a set with this search
	Include this search in one of my sets
	Exclude this search from one of my sets