[GitHub] jena pull request: Jena base to java8

Github user afs commented on the pull request: https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/56#issuecomment-99403016 I'll look again but the NodeTransform and the Closeable issues seem to be the main things and after that the size is due to the number of places that Java8 improves things.

[GitHub] jena pull request: Jena base to java8

Github user ajs6f commented on the pull request: https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/56#issuecomment-99466597 Sounds good. After this, wherever goes the conversation about Java 8, the Streams API, Commons RDF, etc., I will keep PRs much smaller. I felt comfortable trying to get away

[GitHub] jena pull request: Jena base to java8

Github user ajs6f commented on the pull request: https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/56#issuecomment-99121831 Okay, I'll plug `NodeTransform` back in at oaj.sparql.graph, since that is where it was: minimal disruption. I've got the JavaDocs square and re-separated the two

[GitHub] jena pull request: Jena base to java8

Github user afs commented on the pull request: https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/56#issuecomment-99120861 The vast majority of the PR looks good including converting code in passing. MultiMap?mulitSet are unlikely to have leaked (and can be restored if need be); I've already

[GitHub] jena pull request: Jena base to java8

Github user ajs6f commented on the pull request: https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/56#issuecomment-99085428 I'm definitely up for breaking this down. :) The major moves here are: - I replaced any interface inside oaj.atlas for which I could find a

[GitHub] jena pull request: Jena base to java8

Github user ajs6f commented on the pull request: https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/56#issuecomment-99100248 Actually, for `NodeTransform`, perhaps it could be even more tightly scoped to just `org.apache.jena.sparql.algebra.optimize`? --- If your project is set up for it, you can

[GitHub] jena pull request: Jena base to java8

Github user ajs6f commented on the pull request: https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/56#issuecomment-99141455 `NodeTransform` is back-- I think that's all the emendation we wanted, yes? Did you have thoughts about dividing out this large PR? --- If your project is set up

[GitHub] jena pull request: Jena base to java8

GitHub user ajs6f opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/56 Jena base to java8 Work for https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-931 Using Java 8 types and removing code that duplicates functionality found inside the current footprint. You can merge