Re: XJ - xml extension for Java

2005-07-10 Thread Jack Woehr
Jess Holle wrote: Actually I believe Java got it right as compared to C++ -- at least as used in the ANSI C++ generic collections library. This library generates big chunks of object code for *every* type thrown at it -- irrespective of similarities in types. I *think* that footprint issue

Re: XJ - xml extension for Java

2005-07-10 Thread Alexey Solofnenko
I agree with Jess, but there is one piece missing - primitive types in generics. It would save a lot on autoboxing. - Alexey. On 7/10/05, Jess Holle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ... > Actually I believe Java got it right as compared to C++ -- at least as > used in the ANSI C++ generic collect

Re: XJ - xml extension for Java

2005-07-10 Thread Jess Holle
Jack Woehr wrote: Jess Holle wrote: Compile-time checking wherever it is net time savings to the developer and does not hinder runtime performance is a very good thing. In the case of generics, I believe they're a big time saver overall. Generics, while weak compared to C++ container poly

Re: XJ - xml extension for Java

2005-07-10 Thread Jack Woehr
Jess Holle wrote: Compile-time checking wherever it is net time savings to the developer and does not hinder runtime performance is a very good thing. In the case of generics, I believe they're a big time saver overall. Generics, while weak compared to C++ container polymorphism, are a vast

Re: XJ - xml extension for Java

2005-07-10 Thread Jess Holle
Kevin Jackson wrote: I've skipped Java 1.5 for various reasons: 1 - the 'enhanced for loop' is just crap I notice that few people ares disputing this one... Actually I don't see anything wrong with the new for loop and use it a fair amount. It's just unimportant syntactic sugar in

Re: XJ - xml extension for Java

2005-07-10 Thread Kevin Jackson
> > I've skipped Java 1.5 for various reasons: > > 1 - the 'enhanced for loop' is just crap I notice that few people ares disputing this one... > How *anyone* does not need generics is beyond me. This is *huge* in my > book. The amount of silly double-checking I can avoid by knowing the > compi

Re: MKS Source Integrity Solution Task

2005-07-10 Thread Steve Loughran
Arturo Guedez wrote: > Hello everyone, > > > > I am developing a new task for the SCM tool provided by MKS called > Source Integrity. > > > > To run this task users must have a copy of the Source Integrity client, > and must copy the MKS Java API library to the ANT lib directory. I will > include

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 35678] - Multiple source directory in single package support.

2005-07-10 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 35678] - Multiple source directory in single package support.

2005-07-10 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 35678] New: - Multiple source directory in single package support.

2005-07-10 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu