uschindler commented on PR #12033: URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12033#issuecomment-1364516210
> I assume that older JDK support will be eagerly cleaned up? Say only provide support for JDK N and JDK N+1. So the currently shipping JDK and the one in development. Thus limiting the maintenance cost. That's exactly my plan. I will soon add JDK 20 (the code here already prepares that by some code refactoring to enable features only on specific jdk feature versions. I will keep 19 and 20. When LTS 21 comes out hopefully with final release, I will remove 19. At some point we will change main branch on 21 and could therefore remove ByteBuffer support. > I'm not particularly a fan of patching the class files, but it's quite straightforward and is built upon well specified behaviour. Taken together, this change (if you squint) is no worse than depending upon the unsupported Unsafe API (and as Robert says, the less SIGSEGV the better) . 👍 Yes. That's exactly my thoughts. Performance wise there's no risk as we have benchmark and patching the class files here is quite simple and risk less. I would not preprocess class files with ASM or similar. Btw, the idea here with the "doLast" was inspired by ASM 's Gradle build. This works well with caching, as the output of JavaCompile task is still well defined, we just apply the change inside the task. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
