Trygve Laugstøl | 1 Sep 2008 14:50

Re: aspectJ plugin claims to compile on java 1.4 but require java5 runtime

david <at> davidkarlsen.com wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008, nicolas de loof wrote:
> 
>> This is not realted to aspectJ 1.6.1 upgrade : the plugin code itself is
>> based on some java5 API classes and methods :
>>
>> new PrintWriter( File )
>> path.replace( String, String )
>> Element.getTextContent()
>> Document.normalizeDocument()
>>
>> I'm +1 for Java5 requirement.
> 
> Yeah - I forked the compiler and noticed the same methodcalls.
> PrintWriter can easly be replaced with new FileOutputStream( file f )
> path.replace can be replaced with StringUtils from commons-lang
> Element/Document stuff can be fixed by using other methods or adding a 
> DOM3 level parser.
> 
> What do we prefer? Probably this isn't a very huge problem since nobody 
> have reported it earlier (and I have not seen anybody complain on the 
> mailinglists either) - and maven 2.1 is moving in 1.5 direction anyways 
> AFAIK.
> 
> Should we call a vote - or just go for it?

Lots of users are still on 1.4 so the plugin should definitely stay 
there unless you are sure no-one use 1.5 anymore. There really isn't a 
whole lot to gain from moving to 1.5 other than less warnings about 
unchecked collection use[1]. So, please stay on 1.4 unless there are no 
(Continue reading)

david | 1 Sep 2008 18:31
Gravatar

Re: aspectJ plugin claims to compile on java 1.4 but require java5 runtime

On Mon, 1 Sep 2008, Trygve Laugstøl wrote:

>> What do we prefer? Probably this isn't a very huge problem since nobody 
>> have reported it earlier (and I have not seen anybody complain on the 
>> mailinglists either) - and maven 2.1 is moving in 1.5 direction anyways 
>> AFAIK.
>> 
>> Should we call a vote - or just go for it?
>
> Lots of users are still on 1.4 so the plugin should definitely stay there 
> unless you are sure no-one use 1.5 anymore. There really isn't a whole lot to 
> gain from moving to 1.5 other than less warnings about unchecked collection 
> use[1]. So, please stay on 1.4 unless there are no users on 1.4.
>
> [1]: which in itself is annoying but not worth requiring the entire user base 
> to move to 1.5.

That's what I concluded too - so I changed it in a 1.4 compatible way.

--
David J. M. Karlsen - +47 90 68 22 43
http://www.davidkarlsen.com
http://mp3.davidkarlsen.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
(Continue reading)


Gmane