Martin Gainty wrote on 07/31/2005 07:54:54 AM:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Igor Peshansky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Ant Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 6:03 PM
> Subject: Re: XJ - xml extension for Ja
: "Igor Peshansky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Ant Developers List"
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 6:03 PM
Subject: Re: XJ - xml extension for Java
Steve Loughran wrote on 07/04/2005 07:56:31 AM:
Kev Jackson wrote:
> Thought you may find this of interest. IBM have a new w
Jess Holle wrote on 07/10/2005 10:10:57 PM:
> Kevin Jackson wrote:
> [snip]
> >I agree that pushing the correctness problem into the compilation,
> >instead of the runtime phase is valuable in general.
>
> Exactly.
>
> Compile-time checking wherever it is net time savings to the developer
> and
Alexey Solofnenko wrote on 07/04/2005 11:49:38 AM:
> On JavaOne SUN presented something similar for Java 7. The syntax is not
> finilized yet - there are problems - <> characters are used in Java
> generics. They thinking about using # character, but it does not look
good.
> IBM's compiler do
Steve Loughran wrote on 07/04/2005 07:56:31 AM:
> Kev Jackson wrote:
> > Thought you may find this of interest. IBM have a new way of
processing
> > XML docs within Java.
> >
> > http://www.research.ibm.com/xj/samples/sample2.html
> >
> > Very cool page showing how this all works (cool in fir
Alexey Solofnenko wrote on 07/04/2005 11:49:38 AM:
> On JavaOne SUN presented something similar for Java 7. The syntax is not
> finilized yet - there are problems - <> characters are used in Java
> generics. They thinking about using # character, but it does not look
good.
> IBM's compiler do
Jess Holle wrote on 07/10/2005 10:10:57 PM:
> Kevin Jackson wrote:
> [snip]
> >I agree that pushing the correctness problem into the compilation,
> >instead of the runtime phase is valuable in general.
>
> Exactly.
>
> Compile-time checking wherever it is net time savings to the developer
> and
Steve Loughran wrote on 07/04/2005 07:56:31 AM:
> Kev Jackson wrote:
> > Thought you may find this of interest. IBM have a new way of
processing
> > XML docs within Java.
> >
> > http://www.research.ibm.com/xj/samples/sample2.html
> >
> > Very cool page showing how this all works (cool in fir
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
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
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
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
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
> > 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
Kev Jackson wrote:
1. I wish jikes would move up to 1.5; my life is spent waiting for
things to compile again.
I've skipped Java 1.5 for various reasons:
1 - the 'enhanced for loop' is just crap
2 - I've not needed generics, I actually have no need for one of the
major features of the langu
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On Thu, 07 Jul 2005, Kev Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I guess Stefan will want to wait until kaffe, gjc etc support 1.5
properly before we move anything.
Not really. Personally I don't see and going to require 1.5 too soon,
but my reasons are different.
One of
Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote ..
> The transition from 1.1 to 1.2 was far more obvious to me. For
+1
> classloader stuff much more than for collections, all in all there was
> a lot to gain by the move. So far I don't see any language feature
> after that that would improve Ant's co
On Thu, 07 Jul 2005, Kev Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I guess Stefan will want to wait until kaffe, gjc etc support 1.5
> properly before we move anything.
Not really. Personally I don't see and going to require 1.5 too soon,
but my reasons are different.
One of our customers runs 1.3 i
Alexey N. Solofnenko wrote:
We can think whether generics and annotations are good or bad, but
they are now a part of our lives. There is nothing we can do.
- Alexey.
not unless they delete the 1.4 capabilities! "Out of my cold dead
hands".. ;)
Anyway, well said, we sort of have to adapt
We can think whether generics and annotations are good or bad, but they
are now a part of our lives. There is nothing we can do.
- Alexey.
Steve Loughran wrote:
Kev Jackson wrote:
Since you are i hibernate user that may be one of the major reasons
for you to switch (i know i will, eventual
Kev Jackson wrote:
Since you are i hibernate user that may be one of the major reasons
for you to switch (i know i will, eventually) to use the annotations
and EJB3 hibernate stuff.
I actually find Hibernate* to not be as good as advertised, but then I
don't think the EJB3 stuff adds anyth
Since you are i hibernate user that may be one of the major reasons
for you to switch (i know i will, eventually) to use the annotations
and EJB3 hibernate stuff.
I actually find Hibernate* to not be as good as advertised, but then I
don't think the EJB3 stuff adds anything (indeed I feel i
Kev Jackson wrote:
4 - annotations, these seem to be in place for EE/EJB development and
I'm using hibernate and spring.
Since you are i hibernate user that may be one of the major reasons for
you to switch (i know i will, eventually) to use the annotations and
EJB3 hibernate stuff.
Per
Steve Loughran wrote:
On the subject of java1.5; who is using yet?
http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=34983#176758
"I believe that when the author said "ANT generated EJB 2.X classes..."
he really meant "APT generated...". We indeed used ant 1.7's apt task to
run apt,
1. I wish jikes would move up to 1.5; my life is spent waiting for
things to compile again.
I've skipped Java 1.5 for various reasons:
1 - the 'enhanced for loop' is just crap
2 - I've not needed generics, I actually have no need for one of the
major features of the language, maybe I could
Alexey Solofnenko wrote:
On JavaOne SUN presented something similar for Java 7. The syntax is not
finilized yet - there are problems - <> characters are used in Java
generics. They thinking about using # character, but it does not look good.
IBM's compiler does not support generics - it is 1.4
On JavaOne SUN presented something similar for Java 7. The syntax is not
finilized yet - there are problems - <> characters are used in Java
generics. They thinking about using # character, but it does not look good.
IBM's compiler does not support generics - it is 1.4 only.
- Alexey.
--
Alex
On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 12:56 +0100, Steve Loughran wrote:
> Xpath is profound once you apply to
> object trees
Interestingly, and orthogonal to the initial discussion, JXPath has been
able to apply XPaths to object trees for quite some time. (Clearly XJ is
something else again and definitely inter
Kev Jackson wrote:
Thought you may find this of interest. IBM have a new way of processing
XML docs within Java.
http://www.research.ibm.com/xj/samples/sample2.html
Very cool page showing how this all works (cool in firefox anyway).
I like the way you can construct objects from inlined xml
29 matches
Mail list logo
