You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@tubemq.apache.org by guo jiwei <te...@apache.org> on 2020/05/09 07:30:04 UTC

[Suggestion] Substitute the parameterized type with (<>)

Hi dev,
   TubeMQ compiles with Java 1.7 or above, so I suggest to remove the
parameterized type, and substitute with (<>) instead.
   example: List<String> list = new ArrayList<String>(); -> List<String>
list = new ArrayList<>();
   If we think we should do it, Viviel(contributor) and I will split the
task (for it involves almost all the classes) to make it.

Re: [Suggestion] Substitute the parameterized type with (<>)

Posted by guo jiwei <te...@apache.org>.

Hi dev,
   Kindly to inform that the suggestion has been taken into consideration,
and we have already completed the task with JIRA-ID : [TUBEMQ-93
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUBEMQ-93>],[TUBEMQ-94
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUBEMQ-94>],[TUBEMQ-95
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUBEMQ-95>]
   We will close this thread after this email .

Regards
Jiwei Guo (Tboy)

On Sat, May 9, 2020 at 4:44 PM Goson zhang <go...@apache.org> wrote:

> Thanks, remember to assign me a task!
>
>
>
>
> guo jiwei <te...@apache.org> 于2020年5月9日周六 下午3:30写道：
>
> > Hi dev,
> >    TubeMQ compiles with Java 1.7 or above, so I suggest to remove the
> > parameterized type, and substitute with (<>) instead.
> >    example: List<String> list = new ArrayList<String>(); -> List<String>
> > list = new ArrayList<>();
> >    If we think we should do it, Viviel(contributor) and I will split the
> > task (for it involves almost all the classes) to make it.
> >
>

Re: [Suggestion] Substitute the parameterized type with (<>)

Posted by Goson zhang <go...@apache.org>.

Thanks, remember to assign me a task!




guo jiwei <te...@apache.org> 于2020年5月9日周六 下午3:30写道：

> Hi dev,
>    TubeMQ compiles with Java 1.7 or above, so I suggest to remove the
> parameterized type, and substitute with (<>) instead.
>    example: List<String> list = new ArrayList<String>(); -> List<String>
> list = new ArrayList<>();
>    If we think we should do it, Viviel(contributor) and I will split the
> task (for it involves almost all the classes) to make it.
>