On 19/03/2009, Paul Benedict <pbened...@apache.org> wrote: > I think the use of JCIP annotations should be an Apache Commons-wide > decision. It would only be sensible to share the annotations across > projects. Otherwise, we could get fragmentation pretty easily.
Fragmentation? If a project uses concurrency annotations, it should use the same library, buy I see no reason why every component should _have_ to use them. > > Paul > > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 9:48 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 19/03/2009, Stephen Colebourne <scolebou...@btopenworld.com> wrote: > >> sebb wrote: > >> > >> > > >> > > Are you proposing including these pieces of annotation code in > [lang], > >> or > >> > > just referencing them? If its just referencing them, then it has no > real > >> > > effect, and should be fine (aprt from making the compilation a little > >> more > >> > > complex) > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > I'm not sure what you mean by "including" or "referencing". > >> > > >> > I am proposing to add > >> > > >> > import net.jcip.annotations.Immutable > >> > and > >> > @Immutable > >> > > >> > to the source files of classes that deserve it. Similarly for the other > >> cases. > >> > > >> > Much like using @Override, except that the annotations are not part of > the > >> JDK. > >> > > >> > >> Thats OK technically (as there is no runtime dependency on > >> net.jcip.annotations). However, I suspect it will confuse users, as very > few > >> people realise that no dependency is created beyond compilation time. > >> > >> So, overall, I'm dubious as to whether the value is sufficient to > >> compilcate the compliation and to field the inevitable confusion/questions > >> as to 'why we added a dependency' (when we didn't add one really...) > >> > > > > Again, I'm not sure I follow. > > > > I don't see how the addition of a single new dependency complicates > > the compilation. > > If there is any complication, it is from trying to follow what Maven > > is doing ;-). > > > > Nor do I see why users will be confused, so long as the site shows > > that LANG depends on Java 1.5 only. Many of them will just use Maven > > to pick up the new version. If necessary one can always add some > > information on the site as to how annotations behave. > > > > I think it's well worth the exercise of checking all the classes to > > see which annotation applies; if necessary the annotations (and > > imports) could be added as single-line comments. [But I really don't > > want to do that.] > > > > I suspect that the change to using generics will be a much greater > > challenge to users; if they can cope with that, then annotations > > should be relatively easy. > > > > Indeed hopefully users will start adding annotations to their own code... > > > >> Stephen > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >> > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
