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

updated to Trove4J version 3.0.3, and verified as many tests pass as the... #17

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

admackin
Copy link

@admackin admackin commented Jan 7, 2015

It would be great to get compatibility with an updated version of Trove. Trove 2.0.2 is very old now, and since the APIs are incompatible (in terms of package names) it causes problems when integrating with other libraries which use a newer version. Hopefully these changes will be uncontroversial - even though they touch many files, the changes are almost all just in the import statements. The test pass rate is just as good after these changes as before.

@mimno
Copy link
Owner

mimno commented Jan 9, 2015

Thanks! The current plan is to skip Trove 3 and move to HPPC, so I'm not going to officially merge this, but I'm glad it's available.

@admackin
Copy link
Author

Ah great! I really like that it's Apache-licensed. Any idea on the time frame for this? I'm wondering about how long I'll have to maintain my own fork for, since my project has transitive depedencies on the Trove 3 through another package.

(FWIW, I've also heard good things about fastutil - that's it's faster than C++ collections)

On 10 Jan 2015, at 3:16, mimno [email protected] wrote:

Thanks! The current plan is to skip Trove 3 and move to HPPC, so I'm not going to officially merge this, but I'm glad it's available.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

@reckart
Copy link

reckart commented Aug 26, 2016

Any news regarding the move to HPPC (or fastutil)? If not, maybe merging this wouldn't be such a bad idea after all?

@kk415kk
Copy link

kk415kk commented Nov 30, 2016

It looks like the change is in progress but no new version release with it yet:
fd1c49c

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants