On Mon, 2006-12-11 at 12:55 -0700, Tom Tromey wrote: > >>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew John Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Andrew> HEAD is now generics ready. Please test and let me know > Andrew> about anything that broke ASAP. We're open for business again, > Andrew> so, as Mark says, 'please go nuts!' > > Thanks for doing these merges, and for all your work keeping the > generics branch up-to-date these past two years. I believe when I > started I had the naive idea that we wouldn't need to update the > branch... and now I'm especially happy you stepped in to handle this > :-) >
My thanks to both yourself and others for your kind comments on this. > > For Classpath hackers in general: on the generics branch we stuck to a > "shallow" genericization, limited more or less to what Japi would see. > I think it would be appropriate now to start on deeper work, i.e., > moving the use of generics into the bodies of methods and not just on > method signatures. > I agree wholeheartedly. As Tom mentions, the level of generics was deliberately kept shallow on the branch as we knew that we would need to merge in a lot of code from the main development branch. Now, however, it should be possible to take advantage of, for example, collections with type parameters (which may catch a few bugs, hopefully...) This is more important for new code, where you can take advantage of features like this along with autoboxing and for..each loops in your day to day coding. > Tom Cheers, -- Andrew :-) Escape the Java Trap with GNU Classpath! http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html public class gcj extends Freedom implements Java { ... }
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
