Re: [daemon] any incompatibilities between 1.0.3 and 1.0.13

On 02/14/2013 05:30 PM, Sangjin Lee wrote: Hi, Is there any information on incompatibilities between 1.0.3 and 1.0.13? Hadoop is still using 1.0.3 with the known group id issue, and it needs to be upgraded to a later version. We got this information: http://www.apache.org/dist/commons/daemon/RE

Re: [functor] Change default arity of Function, Predicate and Procedure

Am 14.02.2013 16:51, schrieb Matt Benson: I would say that certainly one would often want to create an API like you've described. What I am reluctant not to support is: class Foo { static void add(Argumented> functor); } Foo.add(new BinaryFunction() {}); Foo.add(new BinaryProcedure() {}); F

Re: commons-monitoring?

a good start for me, i like the GUI but the measure and the config is not so friendly (and results seems wrong) *Romain Manni-Bucau* *Twitter: @rmannibucau * *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/* *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linke

[daemon] any incompatibilities between 1.0.3 and 1.0.13

Hi, Is there any information on incompatibilities between 1.0.3 and 1.0.13? Hadoop is still using 1.0.3 with the known group id issue, and it needs to be upgraded to a later version. We got this information: http://www.apache.org/dist/commons/daemon/RELEASE-NOTES.txt But it's not clear whether 1

Re: commons-monitoring?

2013/2/12 Romain Manni-Bucau : > well not enough time right now but i hope in some weeks > > the idea would be to get: > -> something to measure (i think it is already here) > -> some basic aop (abstraction, spring, cdi?) > -> some basic view of the measures (servlet or even a bootstrap webapp ;) >

Re: [functor] Change default arity of Function, Predicate and Procedure

I would say that certainly one would often want to create an API like you've described. What I am reluctant not to support is: class Foo { static void add(Argumented> functor); } Foo.add(new BinaryFunction() {}); Foo.add(new BinaryProcedure() {}); Foo.add(new BinaryPredicate() {}); The argume

Re: [functor] Change default arity of Function, Predicate and Procedure

Hi Matt, Matt Benson wrote: > Once again, an enum wouldn't readily be able to contribute to your > functor's being able to participate in some method by type signature; > i.e., I want to support the use case of: > > add(Argumented somethingThatTakesTwoArguments); > > Maybe this isn't a worthwhi

Re: [functor] Change default arity of Function, Predicate and Procedure

Once again, an enum wouldn't readily be able to contribute to your functor's being able to participate in some method by type signature; i.e., I want to support the use case of: add(Argumented somethingThatTakesTwoArguments); Maybe this isn't a worthwhile goal, but so far I don't see anything els

Re: [functor] Change default arity of Function, Predicate and Procedure

On 14 February 2013 09:13, Jörg Schaible wrote: > Benedikt Ritter wrote: > >> Hi Matt, >> >> >> 2013/2/13 Matt Benson >> >>> TBH, I can't recall what the argument was against "Functor" either; I >>> think it had something to do with potentially confusing users of other >>> libraries? >>> >>> Func

Re: [functor] Change default arity of Function, Predicate and Procedure

Benedikt Ritter wrote: > Hi Matt, > > > 2013/2/13 Matt Benson > >> TBH, I can't recall what the argument was against "Functor" either; I >> think it had something to do with potentially confusing users of other >> libraries? >> >> Functor >> |_NullaryFunctor >> |_UnaryFunctor >> |_BinaryFuncto

Re: [functor] Change default arity of Function, Predicate and Procedure

Hi Jörg, I like the simplicity annotations can provide. As Matt has pointed out Annotations do not define types, which makes it hard to let the compiler do the validation of the code. We could implement a custom annotation post processor. But that would require additional setup for users. Benedik

Re: [functor] Change default arity of Function, Predicate and Procedure

Hi Matt, 2013/2/13 Matt Benson > TBH, I can't recall what the argument was against "Functor" either; I think > it had something to do with potentially confusing users of other libraries? > > Functor > |_NullaryFunctor > |_UnaryFunctor > |_BinaryFunctor > > *is* the current state. :) Now, when