Ah, yes I understand what you mean. I mean to say something slightly different. 1) Keep/Make the source Java 1.7 compliant. 2) Compile using the newest compiler (i.e. 1.8) 3) Compile towards the binary 1.7 compliant.
That way we're taking advantage of the best compiler yet with enough backward compatibility. This would also avoid the 1.8 bytecode problems. Niels Basjes On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 5:59 PM, Ryan Blue <b...@cloudera.com> wrote: > I would agree, but unfortunately Java 8 features required bytecode changes > and Java 8 can't be compiled to target Java 7. There is a good summary of > it a few answers down on this SO question: > > > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/16143684/can-java-8-code-be-compiled-to-run-on-java-7-jvm > > I think that means we should stay on Java 7 as long as possible. I propose > taking a look at this is 6 months or so to see how many people are still > running Java 7 or have moved to 8. > > rb > > > On 12/18/2015 05:03 AM, Niels Basjes wrote: > >> Ryan, >> >> Perhaps we should even make the step to build using Java 8, yet generate >> bytecode at the Java 7 level. >> >> Niels >> >> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Niels Basjes <ni...@basj.es> wrote: >> >> +1 >>> On 18 Dec 2015 12:33, "Tom White" <t...@cloudera.com> wrote: >>> >>> +1 >>>> >>>> Tom >>>> >>>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 1:08 AM, Ryan Blue <b...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> I just noticed that our tests are still compiling and running with Java >>>>> >>>> 6. >>>> >>>>> Java 7 is already end-of-life (public patches at least), so I think it >>>>> >>>> is >>>> >>>>> reasonable to start migrating. Is everyone okay with updating the >>>>> builds >>>>> and dropping support for Java 6? >>>>> >>>>> rb >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Ryan Blue >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >> > > -- > Ryan Blue > Software Engineer > Cloudera, Inc. > -- Best regards / Met vriendelijke groeten, Niels Basjes
