ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kev Jackson <>
Subject Re: XJ - xml extension for Java
Date Wed, 06 Jul 2005 02:30:28 GMT
> 1. I wish jikes would move up to 1.5; my life is spent waiting for 
> things to compile again.

I've skipped Java 1.5 for various reasons:
1 - the 'enhanced for loop' is just crap
2 - I've not needed generics, I actually have no need for one of the 
major features of the language, maybe I could change all my code so that 
the collections are aware of the type of data they contain, but I'm used 
to the 'old' way and it's no bother [shrug]
3 - boxing/unboxing isn't really that special either
4 - annotations, these seem to be in place for EE/EJB development and 
I'm using hibernate and spring.  Sure I could use them to declare 
interfaces etc, but I'm genuinely ok with the old way
5 - static imprts pah I say!

and finally

6 - Jikes doesn't support it, WebLogic doesn't support it (then WebLogic 
barely supports Java)

> 2. <> looks ugly in generics; it should stay in XML where it belongs. 
> Maybe that shows the price of copying c++ too slavishly (except I 
> still think they should haved stuck to bool instead of boolean)
I like boolean, looking at XJ, having the <> in the Java code does look 
a little awkward

> 3. I fear there may be a limit to how well you can take the existing 
> java syntax and make it better for XML, just as with C-omega. 
> Functional and AI languages are a much more natural fit to working 
> with complex graphs/trees of XML data.
Interesting to see what could be done with Lisp for XML processing, but 
then Lisp is for Lists, not graphs/trees

> On the subject of java1.5; who is using <apt> yet?
see above for my Java5 comments


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message