Mike,
Comments below.
Mike Wilson wrote:
I'm never in favor of gratuitously upversioning the EE,
Of course not, that would be gratuitous. :-P
but we have said (even in 3.x) that if there is a reason for
requiring JDK5 (or later) for a particular plug-in, then that's what we
should do.
In general, folks expect to be able to write modern code that doesn't
contain raw type warnings. If APIs surface raw types, as JFace does,
then clients are kind of hosed.
The only real question is "How good does the reason have to be?"
<g>. For e4, we want the new API we create to have a natural,
modern _expression_, but we still have to be sensitive to cases like the
one below.
I would argue that if raw types are surfaced in the API, that's bad,
will definitely be noticed, and is a good reason!
If the eSWT community indicates that they will _actually_consume_ the
CSS work (if it is F1.1 compatible) it seems like we would want to try
and get there -- Having more consumers of the work is a good thing.
I think SWT itself has managed to avoid all use of those nasty
collection APIs: Java 1.0 forever. :-P
It's a hard sell though if this is just about eSWT being a potential
target for e4 in the abstract. We haven't ever said that we are going
to constrain the widget set to be eSWT compatible, and in fact are
considering a superset of the current SWT as the target (i.e. new
capabilities from AIR and Silverlight).
And a compiler ought to be able to generate the erasure...
(and no, that wasn't a definitive answer (/em winks)),
Do the pickets on the fence hurt when you straddle them?
McQ.
Kevin
McGuire---15/12/2008 11:36:33---Hi all, I'm a little confused about
what JDK level we said we'd use for e4 work.
![](gif5oalnTZhlW.gif)
From: |
![](gif5oalnTZhlW.gif)
Kevin McGuire/Ottawa/IBM@IBMCA |
![](gif5oalnTZhlW.gif)
To: |
![](gif5oalnTZhlW.gif)
e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
![](gif5oalnTZhlW.gif)
Date: |
![](gif5oalnTZhlW.gif)
15/12/2008 11:36 |
![](gif5oalnTZhlW.gif)
Subject: |
![](gif5oalnTZhlW.gif)
[e4-dev] JDK level for e4 work? |
Hi all,
I'm a little confused about what JDK level we said we'd use for e4
work.
In the former e4-incubator mail list [1] we said, "We'll discuss at the
summit". In the summit notes I see lots of discussion [2] but no
conclusion. I was not in that session, so perhaps there was a
conclusion that I missed/was missed in the notes?
In doing the recent CSS work I set the dependency as JDK1.5 because
that's what I saw in the following projects:
org.eclipse.e4.ui.services
org.eclipse.e4.ui.workbench
Many would like 1.5 for various reasons (myself included), but as in
the email below, those in the embedded space would naturally like
something more like Foundation 1.1.
We need a definitive answer to avoid costly reworking of code to a
lower JDK level.
Regards,
Kevin
[1] http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/eclipse-incubator-e4-dev/msg00234.html
[2] http://wiki.eclipse.org/E4/Architectural_Foundations
see "Summit Notes for Java 5/supported platforms"
----- Forwarded by Kevin McGuire/Ottawa/IBM on 12/15/2008 10:32 AM -----
I have been trying to get the existing code working with the eRCP
runtime. The good news is after a few hours of hacking and commenting
I was able to get it working. I am now wondering what are the platform
targets for the CSS engine. We can possibly help with the existing
code base to complete it and make it compatible with CDC FP 1.1
(better yet CLCD 1.1 ) also add eSWT and eJface support. Are those
things in the interest and target of the css related work?
--
Gorkem
_______________________________________________
e4-dev mailing list
e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
_______________________________________________
e4-dev mailing list
e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
_______________________________________________
e4-dev mailing list
e4-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
|