Comments on: JSR 310 needs help!

By: kalpesh soni

kalpesh soni — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 17:43:09 +0000

so where will we see this api in java SE?

By: Alex

Alex — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 20:50:38 +0000

Preface: I’m not a JCP guru.

I believe expert groups usually form early and close unless there are extenuating circumstances. Expert groups should (after all) be formed of experts in the domain, not just any interested party.

I think Stephen primarily needs more people to do the work of writing the implementation and fleshing out some of the details. But I’m sure he’d be better one to ask on the 310 mailing list than me.

By: Andreas Ebbert-Karroum

Andreas Ebbert-Karroum — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 17:24:05 +0000

If the JSR needs help, why is it then so, that the expert group is closed and does not accept any more members?

–> http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=310

By: Alex

Alex — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:26:37 +0000

Hamlet, check out the mailing list post I linked. If you offer on the 310 mailing list, I’m sure Stephen can get more specific. For example he lists:

Major areas outstanding are:
- time zones
- leap seconds
- internationalization of formatting
- lenient parsing
- review of periods
- writing the spec

Further topics, currently on the back burner:
- intervals
- iteration over date-time
- additional calendar systems (including historic Gregorian-Julian)
- performance tuning the algorithms
- checking consistency of methods (minus methods match plus methods etc)

By: Michael Easter

Michael Easter — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:08:52 +0000

re: behind. Yikes… The lack of closures is a shame, IMO, but not surprising due to the fractured politics. However, not having JSR 310 in Java 7 would be painful. I don’t buy that “Java is dead” but this would give credence to that argument.

Thanks for the wake-up call…. and the sense that our fate rests, well, with us. We are (in part) responsible for what we receive on the platform.