Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: markspace <-@.>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: unicode
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2011 21:12:08 -0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <j9adna$9pk$1@dont-email.me>
References: <6c991195-ab57-417c-92e0-6d5ee1c451dc@dq7g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> <nfss679ije8c4r70tn9kmnr055vm6nfua0@4ax.com> <4e6e7a2a$0$309$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <j4m4rs$l5g$1@dont-email.me> <4e6eaa8a$0$305$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <j4mgeo$h1c$2@dont-email.me> <4e6ff2a9$0$313$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <j4p3oh$pa2$1@dont-email.me> <4eb89437$0$286$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <j9a71d$a3k$1@dont-email.me> <4eb8a64f$0$286$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 05:12:10 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-host="XjIWM99mD7Ijfdu600oVPA"; logging-data="10036"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18k7mBoKFz4jGtCPREweuS9VWHHnlY0Udo="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110929 Thunderbird/7.0.1
In-Reply-To: <4eb8a64f$0$286$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>
Cancel-Lock: sha1:LgOWvyYRL+D0uMzO7H73sL4GHVg=
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:9773

On 11/7/2011 7:47 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> If you search the Java bug database then you will see that
> SUN got lots of bug reports including some that were compiler
> bugs about this feature.
>
> Somebody did use the feature.


I'll take a look.


> I find it very difficult to see why people (and their employers) that
> have coded according to spec should suffer to help people that have
> not studied the spec.


It's still a $ and cents equation in my mind.  "Suffering" doesn't enter 
the equation.  No matter what the feature, there's got to be a point 
where it's rational to drop support for it.  Happens all the time.

You may disagree with that in regards to this particular issue, but I'm 
having a somewhat hard time seeing why it isn't obvious in the general 
case: sometimes features must be dropped.