On 8/31/2010 9:51 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 10:24 -0400, Robert Casto wrote:
I very much like where this thread is headed.
Having viable options with Java that Oracle can not touch sounds like
a win for the community. There is a lot of value in those libraries
that can be leveraged by a developer. That makes them productive and
of benefit to a company. If all we have to do is change the underlying
VM to something that is safe from Oracle, then so be it. I'm sure that
VM would get a lot more attention from the community to make it great
for production use.
Perhaps the JVM could then support type parameters and the abomination
that is type erasure could be dispensed with.
Er, much a do about rather little in my book.
There have been a handful of times I've hit real type erasure issues in
years of writing generic-ridden code. Is it the ivory tower? No, but
it beats having java.util and java.util2!
--
Jess Holle
--
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.
