David M. Lloyd
David M. Lloyd
Is this a real-world requirement or an idea? I think normally we'd want to discourage conversion to classes expressly designed for concurrent mutability.
Isn't ASM forwards-compatible? IOW it should be okay for any consumers to use a later version, should it not?
> ASM is a low level tool used by a vaste set of tools and app servers. It's sometimes tricky or difficult to align all versions to the latest. Can...
> @dmlloyd I think that the intention is to avoid classpath conflicts (which is quite common in an app server context) with different versions of ASM provided by 3rd party...
> ASM 1, 2, 3, and 4 were all backwards incompatible. We've used ASM in OpenEJB/TomEE since version 1 at got a lot of complaints from users who had different...
Sure, it should be possible. The expression resolution is performed by `smallrye-common-expression` with a resolver which assesses the configuration system for its values.
> `Error: Artifact path is not valid: /bundles/x86_64-linux-gnu-elf/types/void *.yaml. Contains the following character: Asterisk *` > > dang. I thought I could get away with that on *nix :P I...
What does this do? It's not clear from an initial reading.
Yes, the semantics would not change so it is okay to remove.
I'm looking to use CommonMark-Java on a new project, but not having round-trip parsing/rendering is a show-stopper. Any progress on this issue?