Github user ajs6f commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/57#discussion_r29938256
--- Diff:
jena-base/src/main/java/org/apache/jena/atlas/lib/CacheFactory.java ---
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@
/** Create a null cache */
public
Github user ajs6f commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/56#issuecomment-99466597
Sounds good. After this, wherever goes the conversation about Java 8, the
Streams API, Commons RDF, etc., I will keep PRs much smaller. I felt
comfortable trying to get away
Github user ajs6f commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/56#issuecomment-99121831
Okay, I'll plug `NodeTransform` back in at oaj.sparql.graph, since that is
where it was: minimal disruption. I've got the JavaDocs square and re-separated
the two `Closeable
Github user ajs6f commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/56#issuecomment-99085428
I'm definitely up for breaking this down. :)
The major moves here are:
- I replaced any interface inside oaj.atlas for which I could find a
functionally
Github user ajs6f commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/56#issuecomment-99100248
Actually, for `NodeTransform`, perhaps it could be even more tightly scoped
to just `org.apache.jena.sparql.algebra.optimize`?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can
Github user ajs6f commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/56#issuecomment-99141455
`NodeTransform` is back-- I think that's all the emendation we wanted, yes?
Did you have thoughts about dividing out this large PR?
---
If your project is set up
GitHub user ajs6f opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/56
Jena base to java8
Work for https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JENA-931
Using Java 8 types and removing code that duplicates functionality found
inside the current footprint.
You can merge
Github user ajs6f commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/55#issuecomment-98179500
Totally up to you. It's all clear to me and I don't require to parcel it
out, but that's because I've been knee-deep in it. {grin}
If you think it would make for a clearer
Github user ajs6f commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/55#issuecomment-98172820
NOT TO BE MERGED YET. This is just a first draft. There is clearly more to
do to use Java 8 syntax to clarify filtered iteration and I just wanted to get
something out
GitHub user ajs6f opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/55
First draft of migrating Filter to Java 8 Predicate
Continued work on JENA-929.
Specifically, we now begin to migrate o.a.j.util.iterator.Filter and
associated machinery to Java 8's new
Github user ajs6f commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/55#issuecomment-98222682
Ah, history. {grin}
Okay, sounds like we should leave this current PR alone, if you feel that
you can accept it as is.
I'll send another which moves through
Github user ajs6f commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/55#issuecomment-98221169
Actually, there's also `org.apache.jena.atlas.iterator.FilterT`, which
seems to be superseded by Java 8's `Predicate`. Maybe another PR is due here.
---
If your project
Github user ajs6f commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/55#issuecomment-98220199
Okay-- thanks for pointing out `Iter`! It's a bit strange, though. It
doesn't seem to be used all that much. For example, `NiceIterator.toSet()`
doesn't use `Iter.toSet
Github user ajs6f commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/55#issuecomment-98220608
It looks like `Iter` makes use of some types that also have nice Java 8
replacements. Would a migration from
`org.apache.jena.atlas.iterator.TransformT, R` to `Function
Github user ajs6f commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/54#issuecomment-98128730
Hm. That does sound weird. I'll take a look and straighten it out.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub
Github user ajs6f commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/54#issuecomment-98129632
Yep-- Git weirdness. I think that should square it. I'm not mentioning the
Jira issue here because Git mistakes don't seem like part of the long-term
record.
---
If your
Github user ajs6f commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/54#issuecomment-98129734
Right-- I just amended the commit to fully excise AsMapper.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well
Github user ajs6f commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/54#issuecomment-98133375
Thanks!
P.S. Sorry about unused imports and the like. That was sloppy.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear
GitHub user ajs6f opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/54
Deprecating Map1 in favor of Java8 Function
Deprecating Map1 in favor of Java8 Function.
I believe I have managed to avoid mangling any public contracts presented
by Jena.
You can merge
1001 - 1019 of 1019 matches
Mail list logo
