2017-01-31 10:46 GMT+01:00 Jochen Theodorou <blackd...@gmx.org>: > > > On 31.01.2017 09:37, Cédric Champeau wrote: > >> Hi guys, >> >> There are multiple conversations going on for weeks, and I think they >> are going nowhere. We could discuss for months what's the best plan for >> Groovy, without releasing anything. Here are the challenges that are >> waiting for us: >> >> 1. release a version of Groovy that integrates Groovy macros >> 2. upgrade the minimal runtime required for Groovy to 1.7, which is >> required to smoothly transition to higher requirements (and also, make >> our devs lives easier) >> 3. upgrade the minimal runtime required for Groovy to 1.8, allowing us >> to drop the old call site caching and use indy Groovy everywhere >> 4. integrate Parrot, which replaces the use of Antlr2 with Antlr4 >> 5. compatibility with Jigsaw, aka "Groovy as a module" >> > > > >> I would like to propose the following plan: >> >> - Groovy 2.5: integrates 1 and 2, to be released ASAP, we've been >> waiting for this for too long >> - Groovy 2.6: integrate 4, implying backporting Parrot to Java 7 >> - Groovy 3.0: integrate 3 and 5. The only version with necessary >> breaking changes (we have no choice here) >> > > If you insist on a removal of antlr2, then this will be a breaking change, > since we leak antlr2 classes in several places. 2.6 is then only an option > if antlr2 stays. And considering your earlier statements that there should > be only one parser, that means 2.6 has to be 3.0. > > And considering that there is now a Java7 version of Parrot and that there > will be at least two major versions before we are on JDK8... why not just > go with 3.0 right away? >
Because macro groovy doesn't have to be bound with breaking changes. > > So my -1 based on your argumentation from my side. An alternative plan: > > no 2.5 > - 3.0 with macro methods and Java7 and parrot > - 4.0 java8 and jigsaw > > bye Jochen >
