Hiya! been on holidays and with a lot of $dayjob after that, just wanted to close this, so it doesn't slip through. Let's say next version will be 2.12.0, instead of 2.11.4, and it will require JDK-11? As for when to upgrade the JDK requirement, let's just ask the question every minor release, if it's reasonable to do so? Or the other way round, when upgrading the JDK requirement, it would require increasing at least a minor release?
As a side note, and completely agreeing with the reasons to upgrade to JDK-11, my experience with JDK-17 has been very similar to what Murray expressed with JDK-11, cleaner and less verbose code, as compared with JDK-11; multiline strings, pattern matching, helpful NPEs, records, etc. are little things that ease your day to day, and that I've found missing when going back.. kind regards, juan pablo On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 5:36 PM Jürgen Weber <webe...@gmail.com> wrote: > Actually I never understood the need for get/setters anyway (course I know > the book). C++ got along well without. > > Cheers > > Murray Altheim <murra...@altheim.com> schrieb am Di., 9. Aug. 2022, 16:12: > > > On 2022/08/09 22:55, Jürgen Weber wrote: > > > Java 11 would be OK. Not more. Enterprises are very conservative. > > > > Agreed, my current job is largely upgrading dozens and dozens of JDK 8 > > applications which have had no love for over a decade. I'm not so sure > > if this is the result of being conservative so much as executive > > management's typical desire to build New Things rather than maintain > > Old Things, or possibly The World of Constant Emergencies. > > > > > Also, I do not see why a mature product like JSPWiki should be > > > refactored to use newer Java features. > > I'm not a fan of using new features simply because they're new, but I > > have found some of the Java 11 features result in cleaner and less > > verbose code, e.g., some of the streaming syntax removes a lot of lines > > of boilerplate. This can be (like many things) abused and make things > > harder to either read or understand, but on balance I've gotten used to > > using many of the Java 11 features. Post JDK 11, I've found little of > > real value so far. > > > > On one of my larger personal projects I experimented recently with > > trying to back-date the code to JDK 8 and found that I'm very much a > > Java 11 person now, as almost none of the classes compiled as I'd used > > a lot of the new syntax. > > > > I've also previously suggested Lombok, which has for me become somewhat > > of a standard for all new code*. It removes all the pointless getters and > > setters, and with @Builder one effectively gets a DSL. Combining Lombok > > with an enum class really cleans up a lot of ugly use of integer > contants, > > such as found in WikiPageEvent. I'd be happy to help out with migrating > > to Java 11, simply to get rid of that kind of thing... > > > > Cheers, > > > > Murray > > > > * I really wish Lombok were adopted into the Java syntax itself. > > > ........................................................................... > > Murray Altheim <murray18 at altheim dot com> = = > === > > http://www.altheim.com/murray/ === > > === > > = = > > === > > In the evening > > The rice leaves in the garden > > Rustle in the autumn wind > > That blows through my reed hut. > > -- Minamoto no Tsunenobu > > > > >
