<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Thank you, David. Understood your opinion.</p>
<p>In fact, it would be MY sole time and effort to add and maintain
that Path-based API variants (not yours or anybody else's), so why
NOT allowing me to do that? In this area, will do THAT or nothing
at all, in fact. This thread is NOT about what to ask me for
alternatively. So you finally chose NOTHING? Can't see the benefit
of that for my or anybody else's community.</p>
<p>-Markus</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 16.03.2025 um 04:02 schrieb David
Alayachew:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAA9v-_PqsdVyPLvWPijrPzCx4m3eY8ApCfKMSR2eS_4VbbK-DQ@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="auto">
<div>Hello Markus Karg,</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">I spend a lot of my time making Swing apps. I
can certainly relate to the pain of your compatriots.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Truthfully though, I don't see any significant
benefit, other than writing one less method per situation. A
vast majority of my IO work is already pretty specialized, so,
while annoying, it's not really something that I do so much of
that this method would benefit me greatly.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Essentially, I would like to avoid adding more
to the API than there already is, barring any fairly powerful
new additions. I'd like to say that Pattern-Matching will be
an example of something that justifies adding to the API.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">If it were me, I would actually turn it around
and find situations that are worth perturbing the API, then
strongly suggest that those new API's use Path, encouraging
this since there is that little translator method toFile().
Turn your opponent's argument against them, basically lol.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Granted, that's still not an easy task, but I
suspect that you will have momentum in your favor that way.<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote gmail_quote_container" dir="auto">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Mar 15, 2025,
2:26 PM Markus KARG <<a
href="mailto:markus@headcrashing.eu"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">markus@headcrashing.eu</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Since
Java 7 there is java.nio.file.Path as a modern alternative
to <br>
java.io.File. Many APIs in OpenJDK make use of Path
already, but not <br>
java.awt.Desktop. This forces authors of new desktop
applications to <br>
convert to File explicitly. While it is understood there
are not masses <br>
of such applications newly authored, still there are some,
and their <br>
authors contacted me regarding this.<br>
<br>
I would be happy to provide a PR which adds alternative
signatures <br>
allowing to pass Path directly. The change would be very
small hence <br>
quick to review, mostly cheap to maintain, and at most
risk-free, as it <br>
simply internalizes code that otherwise would exist
externally.<br>
<br>
Comments appreciated!<br>
<br>
Regards<br>
<br>
-Markus Karg<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>