commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [lang] Remove JDK 1.3 workaround from FieldUtils
Date Tue, 26 Aug 2014 12:40:42 GMT
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 8:38 AM, Duncan Jones <djones@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi Benedikt,
>
> On 26 August 2014 12:53,  <britter@apache.org> wrote:
> > Author: britter
> > Date: Tue Aug 26 11:53:51 2014
> > New Revision: 1620579
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1620579
> > Log:
> > Add fixme regarding a JDK 1.3 workaround
> >
> > Modified:
> >
>  commons/proper/lang/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/lang3/reflect/FieldUtils.java
> >
> > Modified:
> commons/proper/lang/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/lang3/reflect/FieldUtils.java
> > URL:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/proper/lang/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/lang3/reflect/FieldUtils.java?rev=1620579&r1=1620578&r2=1620579&view=diff
> >
> ==============================================================================
> > ---
> commons/proper/lang/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/lang3/reflect/FieldUtils.java
> (original)
> > +++
> commons/proper/lang/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/lang3/reflect/FieldUtils.java
> Tue Aug 26 11:53:51 2014
> > @@ -85,6 +85,7 @@ public class FieldUtils {
> >      public static Field getField(final Class<?> cls, final String
> fieldName, final boolean forceAccess) {
> >          Validate.isTrue(cls != null, "The class must not be null");
> >          Validate.isTrue(StringUtils.isNotBlank(fieldName), "The field
> name must not be blank/empty");
> > +        // FIXME is this workaround still needed? lang requires Java 6
> >          // Sun Java 1.3 has a bugged implementation of getField hence
> we write the
> >          // code ourselves
>
> Perhaps this is something to discuss on the ML. If we have sufficient
> test coverage in that area, we could just remove the code and check it
> still builds successfully using 1.6. Unless anyone shouts out with a
> good reason why the code should stay.
>

It seems reasonable to remove code that depends on Java 1.3 behavior!

Gary


>
> Kind regards,
>
> Duncan
>
> >
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>


-- 
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message