My understanding was that we had decided to require Java 5 or 6 for servers (owing mostly to the concurrent packages), though the client-side requirements were left unresolved. I thought Java 5+ items were being used in the ongoing FastList refactor.
If I was mistaken, obviously some of what I did was invalid. jamesG -----Original Message----- From: "Niclas Hedhman" <nic...@hedhman.org> Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2010 11:49am To: river-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: light refactoring On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 2:37 PM, <jgr...@simulexinc.com> wrote: > Replacing iterator usage with the enhanced for loop (for each). > Added generic usage to internal methods/fields. (Internal use appeared to be > non-controversial, and might ease future development.) > Removed unused imports. I am curious; Has there been a "move to Java 5" decision already?? Cheers -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java I live here; http://tinyurl.com/3xugrbk I work here; http://tinyurl.com/24svnvk I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
