Re: JDOM 1.1 released!

Tatu Saloranta <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.java.jdom.general
Message-ID <[email protected]>
--- Talden <[email protected]> wrote:
...
> The lack of Java 5.0 feature adoption is likely
> costing JDOM in terms
> of adoption and certainly costing adopters in terms
> of productivity.
> It's going to take a long time to get the API right
> so planning should
> start sooner rather than later.

While I have nothing against moving to Java 5 for JDOM
2.0, and think that it's a good thing when done in a
way to get real benefits, I don't think this matters a
whole lot wrt. JDOM adoption at this point.
I don't think other tree model implementations are
moving to Java 5 particularly fast either, and
specifically core DOM will (have to) move slowly.

So it's a great idea to start thinking how API can be
improved for the next major, non-backwards-compatible
version, focusing on specific benefits: use cases that
can be simplified; typing that can be improved (using
enums as well as generics) to help with IDE
auto-completion amongst other things.

-+ Tatu +-



      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. 
Make Yahoo! your homepage.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs 
_______________________________________________
To control your jdom-interest membership:
http://www.jdom.org/mailman/options/jdom-interest/[email protected]
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.