<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Chaotic Java &#187; JDK7</title>
	<atom:link href="http://chaoticjava.com/posts/category/code/java-language/language/jdk7/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://chaoticjava.com</link>
	<description>The internet, design patterns, frameworks and Java</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Jul 2010 17:09:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>The quiet revolution &#8211; Part I: JSR 296</title>
		<link>http://chaoticjava.com/posts/the-quiet-revolution-part-i-jsr-296/</link>
		<comments>http://chaoticjava.com/posts/the-quiet-revolution-part-i-jsr-296/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jan 2009 18:32:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Aviad</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[JDK7]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Java]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gui]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jsr-296]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[swing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chaoticjava.com/?p=261</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[JSR 296 brings a "Swing for the rest of us" approach for Swing application development.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://chaoticjava.com/posts/the-quiet-revolution-part-i-jsr-296/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Who wants Indexer as the next EoD feature?</title>
		<link>http://chaoticjava.com/posts/who-wants-indexer-as-the-next-eod-feature/</link>
		<comments>http://chaoticjava.com/posts/who-wants-indexer-as-the-next-eod-feature/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2007 07:00:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Aviad</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[JDK7]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chaoticjava.com/posts/who-wants-indexer-as-the-next-eod-feature/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<script type="text/javascript">dzone_url = "http://chaoticjava.com/posts/who-wants-indexer-as-the-next-eod-feature/";</script>We all know the Java Collections Framework &#8211; Collection, List, Set, Map are used in almost every Java application. We also know that operator overloading in not available in Java, something that has caused a huge debate over the years, especially after C# came out and had it as a feature. In fact, just today [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://chaoticjava.com/posts/who-wants-indexer-as-the-next-eod-feature/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Can someone please explain type inference to me?</title>
		<link>http://chaoticjava.com/posts/can-someone-please-explain-type-inference-to-me/</link>
		<comments>http://chaoticjava.com/posts/can-someone-please-explain-type-inference-to-me/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:43:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Aviad</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[JDK7]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chaoticjava.com/posts/can-someone-please-explain-type-inference-to-me/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<script type="text/javascript">dzone_url = "http://chaoticjava.com/posts/can-someone-please-explain-type-inference-to-me/";</script>Not that I don&#8217;t understand the idea. It&#8217;s simple: final map := new HashMap&#60;String,List&#60;Thing>>(); is equal to final HashMap&#60;String,List&#60;Thing>> map = new HashMap&#60;String,List&#60;Thing>>(); And who really wants that kind of line in their code, eh? Why write things twice, anyway? The proposal in Neal&#8217;s blog is considerably sane too, because it offers a way to [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://chaoticjava.com/posts/can-someone-please-explain-type-inference-to-me/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>I say, delegates shmelegates: Delegates vs. Closures</title>
		<link>http://chaoticjava.com/posts/i-say-delegates-shmelegates-delegates-vs-closures/</link>
		<comments>http://chaoticjava.com/posts/i-say-delegates-shmelegates-delegates-vs-closures/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Sep 2007 08:19:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Aviad</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Closures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[JDK7]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chaoticjava.com/posts/i-say-delegates-shmelegates-delegates-vs-closures/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<script type="text/javascript">dzone_url = "http://chaoticjava.com/posts/i-say-delegates-shmelegates-delegates-vs-closures/";</script>In almost every discussion about the new closures proposal, I see a lot of people comparing closures to delegates, and/or complaining that just because C#/.NET has it, Java doesn&#8217;t have to follow. On the latter I will not remark; but regarding a comparison, let&#8217;s make a fair comparison between the two (considering, of course, that [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://chaoticjava.com/posts/i-say-delegates-shmelegates-delegates-vs-closures/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sending events using closures</title>
		<link>http://chaoticjava.com/posts/sending-events-using-closures/</link>
		<comments>http://chaoticjava.com/posts/sending-events-using-closures/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Sep 2007 21:00:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Aviad</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[JDK7]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chaoticjava.com/posts/sending-events-using-closures/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<script type="text/javascript">dzone_url = "http://chaoticjava.com/posts/sending-events-using-closures/";</script>At the end of the day, closures are function pointers. However, it&#8217;s not really clear how already-defined methods on classes could be assigned to a closure. For example, suppose I have the function-type { => double }, and I want to assign to it the method double getVat()? But suppose it is possible, and I [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://chaoticjava.com/posts/sending-events-using-closures/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why not @NotNull?</title>
		<link>http://chaoticjava.com/posts/why-not-notnull/</link>
		<comments>http://chaoticjava.com/posts/why-not-notnull/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Sep 2007 17:10:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Aviad</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[JDK7]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://chaoticjava.com/posts/why-not-notnull/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<script type="text/javascript">dzone_url = "http://chaoticjava.com/posts/why-not-notnull/";</script>I&#8217;ve been reading this post, which eventually led me to this JDK7 proposal. In the blog post itself, a lot of the comments were about whether the hash sign (#) or a more IntelliJ style @NotNull annotation should be used. One even suggested allowing for annotations defined in a certain package (say, java.lang.annotations) to be [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://chaoticjava.com/posts/why-not-notnull/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>20</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
