On 14 Aug 2006, at 15:48, Peter Hunsberger wrote:
On 8/11/06, Jorg Heymans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just as much as i can't give a more compelling reason than i already
have, there is no compelling reason to do the switch either. The core
of my concern, _bluntly put_, was to limit our possible target
audience for the sake of being able to write enhanced for loops.
The way any product or project moves forward is usually by small
incremental changes; these should never be blocked unless there is a
real reason. In other words, the reasons for blocking a project from
going forward must be compelling. The reasons to move forward need
simply to be that the project is better than before.
I think you're oversimplifying the situation here (and quite possibly
i'm overcomplicating it).
- A JDK requirement change is neither small nor incremental.
- The reason to move a project forward should indeed be that the
project is better than before, but not at all costs (read userbase).
Regards
Jorg
