What are you breaking though? Text that would not parse before will now parse as a valid integer in an extremely narrow set of cases. It is *exactly* the same as code that would not compile before compiling now, but at a different phase of development. And guess what...you're going to get this report over, and over, and over...
- Charlie (mobile) On Apr 9, 2016 22:51, "Vitaly Davidovich" <vita...@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't think the risk of breaking existing code in such a common API is > worth the slight convenience improvement. If someone is keen on supporting > such things, they can front this API by replacing underscores themselves, > or more generally have something else accept underscores and canonicalize > to what Integer.valueOf expects. > > On Saturday, April 9, 2016, Charles Oliver Nutter <head...@headius.com> > wrote: > >> I feel like this is an obvious API gap that should be fixed. If it is a >> valid syntax in javac, it should be a valid syntax in JDK APIs. My first >> impression was that this was an obvious oversight. >> >> - Charlie (mobile) >> On Apr 9, 2016 21:04, "Christoph Engelbert" <m...@noctarius.com> wrote: >> >> > Hey Andrew, >> > >> > Not sure it would risk breaking compatibility. It’s fairly easy to >> support >> > it by just replacing underscore before parsing. Do you think of code >> that >> > is expected to not parse underscore arguments? I think it’s a fair >> request >> > to support underscore based integer representations, even though I never >> > needed it yet, anyhow it makes sense to me to give users the >> possibility to >> > have the same integer representation in, let’s say, properties files. >> > >> > Chris >> > >> > > On 09 Apr 2016, at 11:06, Andrew Haley <a...@redhat.com> wrote: >> > > >> > > On 08/04/16 23:36, kedar mhaswade wrote: >> > >> As library writers however, how would you explain this mismatch? >> > > >> > > Changing valueOf(String) runs the risk of breaking existing Java code, >> > > and Java takes compatibility very seriously. Whether it's worth the >> > > risk is a matter of judgement. >> > > >> > > Andrew. >> > > >> > >> > >> > > > -- > Sent from my phone >
