Jess Holle wrote: > Frederic Simon wrote: >> About "considering we still have to use Vector from time to time": I >> asked Mark if he will put them in a "dirty old Java" module that can >> be excluded in a profile. Basically, have clean new Java list of >> modules as a base, and then add "dirty old Java" if you need on top. >> His totally wrongly paraphrased answer: >> - We don't want to cover a profile with a mud pile. >> - If you don't want Vector and Hashtable don't use them. >> >> Kind of disappointing :( >> I want strong deprecation by moving classes to "muddy" modules. > I'd actually like something stronger than deprecated, e.g. "obsolete", > that does not even appear in the default view of Javadoc. I suppose > one could argue that one could just do this with deprecated stuff, but > it seems like there's an initial "we just deprecated this, please stop > using it" phase and then a later "this is ancient cruft, which should > be ignored unless you run into code using it" phase. P.S. Moving "obsolete" stuff to separate modules would generally be nice, but not necessarily always worth the effort, e.g. if other stuff is still implemented with old crufty stuff internally and there are issues with untwisting the connection (e.g. serialization compatibility).
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
