I know, just curious. Although using e.g. Optional could seem tempting to some, the annotations alone would not force us to a complete dual codebase even in the API Nor doing java 1.4 style things;-)
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 4:33 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> wrote: > The annotation by itself doesn't make of the interface a > FunctionalInterface or the opposite (ie you can be without it) - so > yes this is fully useless from a code/bytecode point of view. That's > because getTargetType() was added. > > I'd just remove it and use reflection to determine it. We would then > be able to do a lot more than simple Class which are more and more > java 1.4 (it is very funny to see it aside java 8 code ;)) > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau > http://www.tomitribe.com > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com > https://github.com/rmannibucau > > > 2015-01-20 16:18 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <[email protected]>: > > How, did it lose the annotation or was the method signature changed > > violating the Functional Interface definition? > > > > Werner > > > > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Reinhard Sandtner < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Hey guys > >> > >> build is broken since PropertyConverter is no longer a > FunctionalInterface > >> :-( > >> > >> shall i fix it or is someone working on it? > >> > >> lg > >> reini >
