----- Original Message ----- > On Sat, 2013-03-09 at 12:26 +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 09, 2013 at 11:36:13AM +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote: > > >> Type parametrize uses of generic types in > > >> AnnotationInvocationHandler. > > > > On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 12:09 PM, Mark Wielaard <m...@klomp.org> > > wrote: > > > Generally we avoided generics for VM interface files, so VMs can > > > ignore > > > any "modern" class format extensions in their bootstrap classes. > > > > It shouldn't make any difference to the VM classloader because of > > type > > erasure. What am I missing? > > There are some other small changes in the class file format, class > access flags, attributes. But the main reason was source > compatibility. > It was convenient if the VM and VM interface classes could be build > with > any java language compiler out there (even these days only javac and > ecj > support 1.5+ fully) since they were often build independently from > the > rest of the core classes during bootstrapping of the VM. And keeping > the > core class VM interface as simple as possible, since some of the VM > interface classes could be overridden by a VM is easier when not > using > generics. > > Anyway, I think this class isn't really a VM interface class, so it > should be fine. > > I guess I am just not a big fan of using fancy new (haha, it is 2013 > Mark...) language features unless really necessary. >
I'd rather we left this until after the next release and updated all VM interfaces to 1.5 level at the same time. That's why I've deliberately avoided updating them so far. Take 0.99.1 as being the watershed for pre-1.5 VM interfaces. > Cheers, > > Mark > > > -- Andrew :) Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) PGP Key: 248BDC07 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) Fingerprint = EC5A 1F5E C0AD 1D15 8F1F 8F91 3B96 A578 248B DC07
