Not sure what java.lang.invoke utility methods you are having in mind, to
me it looks complex enough that getting such an API right is not straight
forward and could be better developed outside Lang.
Let's do what Gary proposes and an orderly upgrade - our Java 7
intermediary will mainly be syntac
How about utility methods for java.lang.invoke? There were also some
additions to java.util.concurrent that can be supported in
lang3.concurrent. I'm sure I'm missing other APIs added to JDK 7, but
there's a couple ideas.
On 22 September 2016 at 16:27, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 2:17 PM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 22/09/2016 à 22:58, Gary Gregory a écrit :
>
> > - What else?
>
> I think the real question here is what kind of benefit Java 7 can bring
> to the Commons Lang API. Internal clean-up using the new syntax tricks
> isn't really interesting
Le 22/09/2016 à 22:58, Gary Gregory a écrit :
> - What else?
I think the real question here is what kind of benefit Java 7 can bring
to the Commons Lang API. Internal clean-up using the new syntax tricks
isn't really interesting. The benefits of Java 8 are more obvious.
Emmanuel Bourg
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 1:21 PM, Oliver Heger
wrote:
>
>
> Am 21.09.2016 um 20:20 schrieb Gary Gregory:
> > I'd like to propose an orderly migration assume BC is preserved:
> >
> > - Release 3.5 RC as scheduled this weekend
> > - Release 3.6 with Java 7 changes
> > - Release 3.7 with Java 8 chang
Am 21.09.2016 um 20:20 schrieb Gary Gregory:
> I'd like to propose an orderly migration assume BC is preserved:
>
> - Release 3.5 RC as scheduled this weekend
> - Release 3.6 with Java 7 changes
> - Release 3.7 with Java 8 changes
>
> This will give us an opportunity to do some Java 7 work and
Le 21/09/2016 à 15:17, Jan Matèrne (jhm) a écrit :
> I thought about creating a PR for supplying helper methods for Java8
> lambdas.
Out of curiosity, what kind of methods do you have in mind?
Emmanuel Bourg
-
To unsubscribe, e
Le 21/09/2016 à 15:24, Bruno P. Kinoshita a écrit :
> Thoughts?
We could also have Lamda utility classes in [lang], the classes would
target Java 8 while the other classes would remain at the Java 6 level
(this implies compiling the classes separately and recombining them in
the final jar).
Emma
Bruno P. Kinoshita schrieb am Mi., 21.
Sep. 2016 um 15:27 Uhr:
> I wonder if perhaps [functor] could become a place only for Java8+ FP
> utilities.
>
> It was created before Java8, but it's still not complete. There was some
> work to have a parent project, and the idea was to have a pre-Java8
>
I wonder if perhaps [functor] could become a place only for Java8+ FP utilities.
It was created before Java8, but it's still not complete. There was some work
to have a parent project, and the idea was to have a pre-Java8 implementation,
and another Java8+. But since we lost momentum, I think we
10 matches
Mail list logo
