On 02/11/2014 12:01 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 2/10/14, 1:16 AM, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> this is an issue I was thinking about for some time now, and it is quite
>> some recurrent theme that we face in Commons.
>>
>> Considering our release practice, it is actually quite hard to come u
Gonna have to agree with Phil here. In a couple years, when you're digging
through an API and you run into a random annotation that says @Internal,
you're not going to remember why it was. Adding that kind of specificity
would require documentation (Javadoc), which makes the presence of the
annotat
On 2/10/14, 5:14 PM, sebb wrote:
> The advantage of annotations over Javadoc is that the meaning of each
> annotation is precisely defined.
>
> Javadoc is mainly written in natural language.
> This much harder to pin down precisely (and harder to parse), unless
> one defines a convention for how to
On 11 February 2014 02:12, Chris wrote:
> Conversely, adding an annotation would require the addition of features to
> external tool sets and boilerplate to make it work seamlessly, rather than
> just being a nuisance. It's definitely a win some, lose some situation from
> the sounds of it.
If th
Conversely, adding an annotation would require the addition of features to
external tool sets and boilerplate to make it work seamlessly, rather than
just being a nuisance. It's definitely a win some, lose some situation from
the sounds of it.
-Chris
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 6:14 PM, sebb wrote:
The advantage of annotations over Javadoc is that the meaning of each
annotation is precisely defined.
Javadoc is mainly written in natural language.
This much harder to pin down precisely (and harder to parse), unless
one defines a convention for how to express the various
characteristics of the
That ping came months ago, it's just that my OSS velocity is that slow
these days. I guess I'll just have to get on the RC merry-go-round. :/
Matt
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 6:59 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Unless this is a practice run, you want want to ping the ML with a "Hey, I
> want to do an
Unless this is a practice run, you want want to ping the ML with a "Hey, I
want to do an RC this , feel free to poke around before that.". It
might save you an RC or two.
Gary
-- Forwarded message --
From:
Date: Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 7:56 PM
Subject: svn commit: r1566932 -
/common
Online report :
https://continuum-ci.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=28082&projectId=97
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Ok
Started at: Mon 10 Feb 2014 23:20:40 +
Finished at: Mon 10 Feb 2014 23:25:50 +
Total time: 5m 9s
Build Trigger: Schedule
On 2/10/14, 1:16 AM, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this is an issue I was thinking about for some time now, and it is quite
> some recurrent theme that we face in Commons.
>
> Considering our release practice, it is actually quite hard to come up with
> new features as the API is more or less fi
If you could get the tool support there, then I could definitely see a
reason for the annotations. Without the tool support though, it just seems
like unnecessary documentation bloat.
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 2:56 PM, Thomas Neidhart
wrote:
> On 02/10/2014 05:44 PM, Chris wrote:
> > Hi Thomas,
>
On 02/10/2014 05:44 PM, Chris wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> If this is only for documentary purposes, it seems a bit strange in my
> mind. Wouldn't a comment at the header serve the same purpose?
right now it would mainly be used for documentation purposes as tool
support is not yet there. Instead of b
On 10 February 2014 17:55, Matt Benson wrote:
> Version 1.0 of jcip as available from Maven central seems to declare the
> annotations with runtime retention. However, it has always been my
> understanding that missing annotation types, even for those with runtime
> retention, did not cause error
Version 1.0 of jcip as available from Maven central seems to declare the
annotations with runtime retention. However, it has always been my
understanding that missing annotation types, even for those with runtime
retention, did not cause errors at runtime. I have just verified this by
creating a
On 10 February 2014 09:16, Thomas Neidhart wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> Additionally, I would like to introduce also the annotations from the jcip (
> jcip.net). I do not know if we can add them as dependency, but we could
> also add them ourselves. IMO this would be of great benefit to our users if
> it is
Hi Thomas,
If this is only for documentary purposes, it seems a bit strange in my
mind. Wouldn't a comment at the header serve the same purpose?
-Chris
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 7:03 AM, luc wrote:
> Le 2014-02-10 10:16, Thomas Neidhart a écrit :
>
>> Hi,
>>
>
> Hi Thomas,
>
>
>
>> this is an is
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 4:32 PM, luc wrote:
> Le 2014-02-10 16:05, Thomas Neidhart a écrit :
>
> Hi Luc,
>>
>> it is on my queue of things to do.
>> I already started to look at qhull (www.qhull.org) which is under a very
>> permissive license and contains algorithms for convex hull, voronoi and
Le 2014-02-10 16:05, Thomas Neidhart a écrit :
Hi Luc,
it is on my queue of things to do.
I already started to look at qhull (www.qhull.org) which is under a
very
permissive license and contains algorithms for convex hull, voronoi and
triangulation for arbitrary dimensions.
This seems nice.
Hi Luc,
it is on my queue of things to do.
I already started to look at qhull (www.qhull.org) which is under a very
permissive license and contains algorithms for convex hull, voronoi and
triangulation for arbitrary dimensions.
Implementing the other convex hull algorithms were my first steps to
Hi,
Thomas, do you intend to add an implementation of convex hull for 3D?
I need one soon ...
best regards
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.or
Le 2014-02-10 10:16, Thomas Neidhart a écrit :
Hi,
Hi Thomas,
this is an issue I was thinking about for some time now, and it is
quite
some recurrent theme that we face in Commons.
Considering our release practice, it is actually quite hard to come up
with
new features as the API is more
Hi,
this is an issue I was thinking about for some time now, and it is quite
some recurrent theme that we face in Commons.
Considering our release practice, it is actually quite hard to come up with
new features as the API is more or less fixed once it has been included.
Ideally, this could or sh
22 matches
Mail list logo
