On Feb 6, 2008 8:25 PM, Stephen Colebourne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The following would be binary backwards incompatible: > > > FileUtils > > - public static void writeStringToFile(File file, CharSequence data, > > String encoding) > > [note CharSequence version replaces String falvour] > > > IOUtils > > - public static InputStream toInputStream(CharSequence input) > > - public static InputStream toInputStream(CharSequence input, String > > encoding) > > - public static void write(CharSequence data, Writer output) > > - public static void write(CharSequence data, OutputStream output) > > - public static void write(CharSequence data, OutputStream output, > > String encoding) > > [Note CharSequence replaces String and/or StringBuffer flavours] > > > So the changes are pretty minimal for IO - question is are these > > incompatible changes with generics being erased? If not then perhaps > > we can do this without breaking anything.
OK for the above I added new methods, rather than changing the method signature - so still compatbile atm: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=619188 > All the other changes are binary compatible. Except for the problem that > the bytecode format for Java 5 is different as well, so you'd need > retrotranslator to help you out as well. Anything that depends on a JDK 1.5 IO version will have to also be minimum JDK 1.5 and therefore direct or indirect users must be running on JDK 1.5 - so I don't see any need for retrotranslator or issues for users. Have I missed something? > In addition to the changes above, you will probably want to change most > APIs that take in a Collection to take an Iterable instead. OK I just had a quick scan and it looks we have the following methods where we could do this: FilenameUtils.isExtension() FileUtils.convertFileCollectionToFileArray() FileUtils.writeLines() IOUtils.writeLines() but this could also be done by just adding new flavours with an Iterable, rather than changing the existing methods. > We should probably remove all references to arrays in the public API, as > generics and arrays work badly together, and I would strongly recommend > treating arrays as a type not to be exposed on any public API post-Java5. Perhaps you could expand more on this because I don't see a big issue for IO - are you thinking along the following lines: http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2005/06/12/Comparable or something else? Niall > Both these changes would be backwards incompatible. > > Finally, we should look to see if we can use the Appendable interface in > any of our APIs. This may also result in incompatible changes. > > > Stephen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
