Another advantage of deciding on 1.5 is we can have native enumeration
support. I would definitely like to see this in the modeler and could
try to add it (my Swing skills aren't so hot, but I can be stubborn).
I'd like to be able to define the enumerated values in the modeler and
be able to choos
---
From: Kevin Menard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2007 10:39 PM
To: dev@cayenne.apache.org
Subject: RE: Java 5
I think I'll poll the user list and see how many actually use 1.4
still
anyway. It'd be educational.
As you've all likely seen, I started up the po
> -Original Message-
> From: Kevin Menard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2007 10:39 PM
> To: dev@cayenne.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Java 5
>
> I think I'll poll the user list and see how many actually use 1.4
still
> anyway. It
http://g.oswego.edu/dl/classes/EDU/oswego/cs/dl/util/concurrent/intro.html
On 8/6/07, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't have details in front of me, but I understand that many of
> the popular Concurrent classes have been back-ported to Java 1.4. If
> you like, I can get more d
I think there are ways to fully port 1.5 stuff to 1.4 (yes - except
for bytecode format). There is an open source project somewhere that
does back-compiling. But I'd rather we avoid more temporary hacks.
There is nothing that is pressing us to switch, so we can wait and
pick the right time.
I don't have details in front of me, but I understand that many of
the popular Concurrent classes have been back-ported to Java 1.4. If
you like, I can get more details if you can't find it on the Internet.
The back-port classes don't use the new Java byte-codes that were
added in Java 5 so
On Aug 5, 2007, at 5:39 AM, Kevin Menard wrote:
the new concurrent API could yield significant speed improvements.
Being all backwards compatible, I haven't played much with that, but
I suspect that things like ConcurrentHashMap should help us to
improve throughput of DataRowStore and Eve
sure and the new concurrent API could
> yield significant speed improvements.
>
> --
> Kevin
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Andrus Adamchik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2007 2:22 PM
> > To: dev@cayenne.apache.org
> > Subject
22 PM
> To: dev@cayenne.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Java 5
>
> Yeah, I'd think we should preserve the 1.4 compatibility for 3.0
> Cayenne Persistence API (vs. JPA that is 1.5 by definition).
> Personally I hope I'll be off 1.4 in a matter of months on all my
> projects,
Yeah, I'd think we should preserve the 1.4 compatibility for 3.0
Cayenne Persistence API (vs. JPA that is 1.5 by definition).
Personally I hope I'll be off 1.4 in a matter of months on all my
projects, but I am sure lots of users will appreciate us preserving
it for another year or so.
I
On 04/08/2007, at 4:07 AM, Kevin Menard wrote:
How much longer is 1.4 going to be the target platform?
Interesting because I am in the middle of a process of taking our
biggest piece of software (around 100,000 lines of code) and
generifying [1] it for 1.5. The decision was made to abando
I wouldn't see a problem with making 3.0 require Java 1.5.
JPA already requires Java 1.5.
On 8/3/07, Kevin Menard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Another one to ponder. It should be my last today ;-)
>
> According to [1], Java 5 was released nearly three years ago. At the
> time of its release, it
12 matches
Mail list logo
