Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #19646 > unrolled thread

which version of Java to use

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer

Contents

  which version of Java to use Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-11-07 15:26 -0800
    Re: which version of Java to use Knute Johnson <nospam@rabbitbrush.frazmtn.com> - 2012-11-07 15:43 -0800
    Re: which version of Java to use Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2012-11-07 20:29 -0400
    Re: which version of Java to use Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2012-11-08 09:51 -0600
    Re: which version of Java to use Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-11-08 11:31 -0500
      Re: which version of Java to use Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2012-11-08 13:33 -0500
        Re: which version of Java to use Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-11-08 13:48 -0500
        Re: which version of Java to use Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-11-09 13:46 -0800

#19646 — which version of Java to use

I distribute source for java for 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5, 1.6 and 1.7

I have been thinking about upgrading at notch or so.

My basic classification rule is:

1.1 purely computational stuff.
1.2 needs a collection
1.3 needs Swing
1.5 for complicated Applets, Java Web Start
1.6 for command line utils.
1.7 for code examples.

What would you recommend?|
-- 
Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products http://mindprod.com
Ironically, even though the Internet was created by the US military 
[DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency)]
to withstand a nuclear attack, it is almost defenceless against malice
from any of its users

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#19648

On 11/7/2012 15:26, Roedy Green wrote:
> I distribute source for java for 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5, 1.6 and 1.7
>
> I have been thinking about upgrading at notch or so.
>
> My basic classification rule is:
>
> 1.1 purely computational stuff.
> 1.2 needs a collection
> 1.3 needs Swing
> 1.5 for complicated Applets, Java Web Start
> 1.6 for command line utils.
> 1.7 for code examples.
>
> What would you recommend?|
>


On the software that I maintain, I try to keep current.  I still have 
some software running at clients on 1.6 but I've checked it all for 1.7 
and will have most of it running on a 1.7 JRE soon.

I'm lucky though the software we lease is also maintained by us.

I can't see any reason now to write for anything less than 1.6.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#19651

On 11/07/2012 07:26 PM, Roedy Green wrote:
> I distribute source for java for 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5, 1.6 and 1.7
>
> I have been thinking about upgrading at notch or so.
>
> My basic classification rule is:
>
> 1.1 purely computational stuff.
> 1.2 needs a collection
> 1.3 needs Swing
> 1.5 for complicated Applets, Java Web Start
> 1.6 for command line utils.
> 1.7 for code examples.
>
> What would you recommend?|
>
Except in the rare case of a customer that is stuck with 1.5 or earlier, 
and has $$$ and cannot easily move to >1.5, I'd go with at least the 
latest 1.6.

I don't unreservedly recommend 1.7 across the board because there are 
still a lot of apps and Java infrastructure that are 1.6.x or are tested 
only against 1.6.x. And I've recently still had a few things fail on 
1.7. But usually (in the absence of instructions as to what Java version 
to use, and given some thought as to the nature of the app and its age) 
I'd try 1.7 first.

AHS

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#19662

On 11/7/2012 5:26 PM, Roedy Green wrote:
> I distribute source for java for 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5, 1.6 and 1.7
>
> I have been thinking about upgrading at notch or so.
>
> My basic classification rule is:
>
> 1.1 purely computational stuff.
> 1.2 needs a collection
> 1.3 needs Swing
> 1.5 for complicated Applets, Java Web Start
> 1.6 for command line utils.
> 1.7 for code examples.
>
> What would you recommend?|

Java 5 came out about 8 years ago, and it added generics, type-safe 
enums, a working memory model, concurrency goodies, nonblocking I/O, and 
so many other things in general that it's almost worth calling a 
different language. I'm not aware of anything that is still maintained 
that doesn't support at least the Java 5 feature set. At this point in 
time, you're more likely to come across a user without Java than a user 
with Java 1.4 or less...

-- 
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not 
tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#19663

On 11/7/2012 6:26 PM, Roedy Green wrote:
> I distribute source for java for 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5, 1.6 and 1.7
>
> I have been thinking about upgrading at notch or so.
>
> My basic classification rule is:
>
> 1.1 purely computational stuff.
> 1.2 needs a collection
> 1.3 needs Swing
> 1.5 for complicated Applets, Java Web Start
> 1.6 for command line utils.
> 1.7 for code examples.
>
> What would you recommend?|

I am not sure that I see the problem.

If you develop software for money, then customers will
specify what version that you need to support.

For new stuff that would probably be 1.7 or 1.6.

For enhancements to existing stuff you could risk
seeing 1.5 and maybe even 1.4.

If you develop software for fun, then you pick the
minimum version that you consider appropriate for the
task.

If in doubt then just pick the latest and greatest
1.7.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#19667

On 11/8/2012 11:31 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 11/7/2012 6:26 PM, Roedy Green wrote:
>> I distribute source for java for 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5, 1.6 and 1.7
>>
>> I have been thinking about upgrading at notch or so.
>>
>> My basic classification rule is:
>>
>> 1.1 purely computational stuff.
>> 1.2 needs a collection
>> 1.3 needs Swing
>> 1.5 for complicated Applets, Java Web Start
>> 1.6 for command line utils.
>> 1.7 for code examples.
>>
>> What would you recommend?|
>
> I am not sure that I see the problem.
>
> If you develop software for money, then customers will
> specify what version that you need to support.

     The problem is that you may not be in a position to ask:
"The customer" could be the million people whom you hope will
buy your app for ninety-nine cents.  In this case you want the
Java version that is most widely installed (among versions that
offer features you simply can't manage without).

     What Java version ships on Macs these days?

-- 
Eric Sosman
esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#19668

On 11/8/2012 1:33 PM, Eric Sosman wrote:
> On 11/8/2012 11:31 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 11/7/2012 6:26 PM, Roedy Green wrote:
>>> I distribute source for java for 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5, 1.6 and 1.7
>>>
>>> I have been thinking about upgrading at notch or so.
>>>
>>> My basic classification rule is:
>>>
>>> 1.1 purely computational stuff.
>>> 1.2 needs a collection
>>> 1.3 needs Swing
>>> 1.5 for complicated Applets, Java Web Start
>>> 1.6 for command line utils.
>>> 1.7 for code examples.
>>>
>>> What would you recommend?|
>>
>> I am not sure that I see the problem.
>>
>> If you develop software for money, then customers will
>> specify what version that you need to support.
>
>      The problem is that you may not be in a position to ask:
> "The customer" could be the million people whom you hope will
> buy your app for ninety-nine cents.  In this case you want the
> Java version that is most widely installed (among versions that
> offer features you simply can't manage without).

True.

But it is still customer driven.

And besides the number of Java apps going to millions of customers
is "somewhat limited".

>      What Java version ships on Macs these days?

Latest Mac's does not ship with Java, but Oracle has 7u9
for Mac available.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#19680

On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 13:33:36 -0500, Eric Sosman
<esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted
someone who said :

>     The problem is that you may not be in a position to ask:
>"The customer" could be the million people whom you hope will
>buy your app for ninety-nine cents.  In this case you want the
>Java version that is most widely installed (among versions that
>offer features you simply can't manage without).

Exactly!

My apps are free. I intend for people to cannibalise my code for
private and public apps. I was just wondering what sorts of complaints
people get about their code not working for older versions.

Part of me wants to go pure 1.7 just for my own convenience, and to
apply a little pressure on the world to stop using old Java versions.

-- 
Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products http://mindprod.com
Ironically, even though the Internet was created by the US military 
[DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency)]
to withstand a nuclear attack, it is almost defenceless against malice
from any of its users

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer

csiph-web