Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Properties.isJavaAtLeast is not futureproof and will start giving wrong results with Java 8 #7265

Closed
scabug opened this issue Mar 18, 2013 · 4 comments
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@scabug
Copy link

@scabug scabug commented Mar 18, 2013

/** Can the java version be determined to be at least as high as the argument?
  * Hard to properly future proof this but at the rate 1.7 is going we can leave
  * the issue for our cyborg grandchildren to solve.
  */
  def isJavaAtLeast(version: String) = {
    val okVersions = version match {
      case "1.5" => List("1.5", "1.6", "1.7")
      case "1.6" => List("1.6", "1.7")
      case "1.7" => List("1.7")
      case _ => Nil
    }
    okVersions exists (javaVersion startsWith _)
  }

Although a quick survey of my offspring returned a sad empty response set, I think that code has reached it's end of life.

@scabug
Copy link
Author

@scabug scabug commented Mar 18, 2013

Imported From: https://issues.scala-lang.org/browse/SI-7265?orig=1
Reporter: @soc
Affected Versions: 2.9.3, 2.10.1, 2.11.0-M2

@scabug
Copy link
Author

@scabug scabug commented Mar 20, 2013

@scabug
Copy link
Author

@scabug scabug commented May 20, 2013

@JamesIry said:
2.10.2 is about to be cut. Kicking down the road and un-assigning to foster work stealing.

@scabug
Copy link
Author

@scabug scabug commented Jun 27, 2013

@som-snytt said:
For the moment at least,
scala/scala#2666

@scabug scabug closed this Jul 12, 2013
@scabug scabug added this to the 2.10.3-RC1 milestone Apr 7, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

None yet
2 participants