You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucene.apache.org by Peter Mularien <pm...@deploy.com> on 2002/11/12 20:55:10 UTC
Usage of JDK 1.2 features/JDK compatibility?
I was working on the getFieldNames diffs and was wondering whether it is
officially OK to use JDK 1.2 features or whether we are trying to
maintain compatibility with JDK 1.1.x. I didn't see this addressed
anywhere, so I figured I'd ask first. If we are trying to remain
compatible with earlier JDKs, is there a point at which we are missing
out on some functionality or improvements that make it more useful to
drop compatibility for obsolete JDKs?
Thanks
Peter
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Usage of JDK 1.2 features/JDK compatibility?
Posted by Peter Mularien <pm...@deploy.com>.
Brian -
Thanks for information. Diffs coming shortly.
Peter
Brian Goetz wrote:
>>I was working on the getFieldNames diffs and was wondering whether it is
>>officially OK to use JDK 1.2 features or whether we are trying to
>>maintain compatibility with JDK 1.1.x. I didn't see this addressed
>>anywhere, so I figured I'd ask first. If we are trying to remain
>>compatible with earlier JDKs, is there a point at which we are missing
>>out on some functionality or improvements that make it more useful to
>>drop compatibility for obsolete JDKs?
>>
>>
>
>I think we discussed this on the list about six mos ago and decided
>that 1.1 was ancient history.
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Usage of JDK 1.2 features/JDK compatibility?
Posted by Brian Goetz <br...@quiotix.com>.
> I was working on the getFieldNames diffs and was wondering whether it is
> officially OK to use JDK 1.2 features or whether we are trying to
> maintain compatibility with JDK 1.1.x. I didn't see this addressed
> anywhere, so I figured I'd ask first. If we are trying to remain
> compatible with earlier JDKs, is there a point at which we are missing
> out on some functionality or improvements that make it more useful to
> drop compatibility for obsolete JDKs?
I think we discussed this on the list about six mos ago and decided
that 1.1 was ancient history.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>