Thank you-- that sounds like a good move to make to prevent myself from breaking backwards compatibility.
What would be the best way to incorporate your material into my Java 8-related work? Would it be best to wait for it to be merged, or is that some time away? --- A. Soroka The University of Virginia Library On May 2, 2015, at 3:50 AM, Claude Warren <[email protected]> wrote: > I have ExtendedIterator contract tests in the new test suite. So we should > have reasonable test cover for the contract. That code is in the old > new_test branch and will be in the new contract test branch soon. I you > want I can send you the source to test your implementation with. This will > mean adding junit-contracts as a dependency for your tests. > > Claude > > On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 5:26 PM, [email protected] <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Yes, in that case, the change was no more than "extends Filter<T>" -> >> "implements Predicate<T>". No other changes. >> >> You can take a look at what's going on at: >> >> https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/55 >> >> and please comment! As a Jena newbie, I need comments. {grin} >> >> --- >> A. Soroka >> The University of Virginia Library >> >> On May 1, 2015, at 12:19 PM, Claude Warren <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> An example is: >>> >>> org.apache.jena.security.utils.RDFListSecFilter >>> >>> Which filters results based on user access and is used whereever a >> RDFList >>> (or an iterator on one) is returned . >>> >>> Claude >>> >>> On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 5:12 PM, [email protected] <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Oh, now I think I understand your point better. >>>> >>>> Yes, I have already trawled that code and worked over those reusable >> guys, >>>> and yes, you will certainly still be able to combine and reuse >> Predicates >>>> in the same way that you have used Filters. When I get this PR in, you >> can >>>> see some examples of that. >>>> >>>> A Java 8 Predicate is just an interface that looks much like Jena's >>>> Filter, which can benefit from the -> lamda syntax and which is >> designed to >>>> fit into the Java 8 language APIs (e.g. for use with Streams). >>>> >>>> --- >>>> A. Soroka >>>> The University of Virginia Library >>>> >>>> On May 1, 2015, at 12:07 PM, Claude Warren <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> We have a number of places where Filter objects are created and reused >>>>> (usueally due to complexity or to reduce the code footprint in terms of >>>>> debugging). Will it still be possible to define these complex filters >>>> and >>>>> use them in multiple places. >>>>> >>>>> The permissions system does this in that it creates a filter for >> RDFNodes >>>>> and then applies them to the 3 elements in a triple to create a single >>>>> filter for triples. >>>>> >>>>> There are several cases like this. >>>>> >>>>> I will have to look at the permissions code to find a concrete example, >>>> but >>>>> I think this is the case. >>>>> >>>>> Claude >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 4:53 PM, [email protected] <[email protected] >>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> As for the Filter implementation..... will that be transparant to >>>> filter >>>>>> implementations? I assume so. >>>>>> >>>>>> I think this was in response to my question about Filter? >>>>>> >>>>>> If you mean that things that currently implement Filter (outside of >>>> Jena's >>>>>> own code) will not be greatly affected, then yes, so I would hope. I >>>> will >>>>>> @Deprecated Filter and its methods, but that seems to me to be all >> that >>>> is >>>>>> needed for this first step. >>>>>> >>>>>> I should have a PR with this later today, when you can observe some >> real >>>>>> code and give me feedback. >>>>>> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> A. Soroka >>>>>> The University of Virginia Library >>>>>> >>>>>> On May 1, 2015, at 11:47 AM, Claude Warren <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I don't see any reason not to remove the Node functions. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As for the Filter implementation..... will that be transparant to >>>> filter >>>>>>> implementations? I assume so. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 4:16 PM, Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> (mainly for Claude - I did check jena-pemissions and didn't see any >>>>>> usage) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There are a bunch of deprecated statics in Node (the correct way is >> to >>>>>> use >>>>>>>> NodeFactory) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Node.createAnon() >>>>>>>> Node.createAnon(AnonId) >>>>>>>> Node.createLiteral(LiteralLabel) >>>>>>>> Node.createURI(String) >>>>>>>> Node.createVariable(String) >>>>>>>> Node.createLiteral(String) >>>>>>>> Node.createLiteral(String, String, boolean) >>>>>>>> Node.createLiteral(String, String, RDFDatatype) >>>>>>>> Node.createLiteral(String, RDFDatatype) >>>>>>>> Node.createUncachedLiteral(Object, String, RDFDatatype) >>>>>>>> Node.createUncachedLiteral(Object, RDFDatatype) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It looks like they are not used by the jena codebase and are there >> for >>>>>>>> compatibility only. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Any reason not to remove them? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Andy >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> I like: Like Like - The likeliest place on the web >>>>>>> <http://like-like.xenei.com> >>>>>>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/claudewarren >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> I like: Like Like - The likeliest place on the web >>>>> <http://like-like.xenei.com> >>>>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/claudewarren >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> I like: Like Like - The likeliest place on the web >>> <http://like-like.xenei.com> >>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/claudewarren >> >> > > > -- > I like: Like Like - The likeliest place on the web > <http://like-like.xenei.com> > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/claudewarren
