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

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #38581

Re: Java Version

Show all headers | View raw

Strange things happen right now:

Class File Version Number is 54.0 

The class file version has been changed 
from 53 (or 44 + 9) to 54 (44 +10), even 
though JDK 10 did not introduce other 
changes to the class file format.

The OpenJDK community has adopted a new 
time-based release model, in which major 
releases of the Java platform occur every 
6 months. As a consequence, it is anticipated 
that class file changes will also occur 
more rapidly. To ensure predictability for 
the tooling that processes class file bytes, 
the class file version will be incremented 
every major release even if there are no 
other changes to the class file format. 
In effect, the class file version will 
be 44 + $FEATURE, where $FEATURE is the 
feature-release counter (previously referred 
to as the major number) of the Java SE Platform 
and the JDK version string.

http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/10-relnote-issues-4108729.html#Remaining

Am Mittwoch, 29. August 2018 02:09:34 UTC+2 schrieb burs...@gmail.com:
> I guess with target 1.5 you get the generic
> types not included in the byte code, so code 
> that would do reflection on these wouldn't work.
> 
> Not sure. generic types are useful for compilation, 
> but then at runtime I don't need them, so I use 
> target 1.5 habitually...
> 
> Am Mittwoch, 29. August 2018 02:07:06 UTC+2 schrieb burs...@gmail.com:
> > For the CheerpJ test I even used:
> > 
> >    bytecode version: 49.0 (Java 5.0)
> >  
> > There are applet issues:
> > 
> >    "I can not launch my java application 
> >    as a web applet in HTML (I am using HTML 
> >    4.01, I know it doesn't work in html5). 
> >    The error message it returns is:
> >    java : Unsupported major.minor version 52.0
> >    https://stackoverflow.com/questions/23249331/java-unsupported-major-minor-version-52-0
> > 
> > I think there is an interim time, where 
> > both 49.0 and 52.0 are support by the 
> > usual Java runtimes. Not sure.
> > 
> > But with respect to some Tomcat Servers, Applets 
> > etc.. I habitually compile with target 1.5. I did 
> > not yet check CheerpJ with a different target.
> > 
> > Am Mittwoch, 29. August 2018 01:58:45 UTC+2 schrieb burs...@gmail.com:
> > > Corr.:
> > > BTW: Same case with Java.
> > > 
> > > By that I mean, for Java libraries you also 
> > > need to only look for interface compatibility
> > > I guess. If the code involves side effects,
> > > 
> > > well then you possibly need to know more
> > > about the libraries....
> > > 
> > > Am Mittwoch, 29. August 2018 01:56:41 UTC+2 schrieb burs...@gmail.com:
> > > > The language level is independent of the Android
> > > > Libraries. Language features along the code and
> > > > not along the interface are not seen in the
> > > > 
> > > > Android Libraries, since they are only seen as
> > > > interfaces. If you open an Android library in
> > > > my IDE, you only see:
> > > > 
> > > > public final class Class<T> 
> > > >    implements Serializable, GenericDeclaration, 
> > > >               Type, AnnotatedElement {
> > > > 
> > > >         Class() {
> > > >         throw new RuntimeException("Stub!");
> > > >     }
> > > > 
> > > >     public String toString() {
> > > >         throw new RuntimeException("Stub!");
> > > >     }
> > > > 
> > > >     public String toGenericString() {
> > > >         throw new RuntimeException("Stub!");
> > > >     }
> > > > 
> > > > BTW: Same case with Java. So all that counts would
> > > > be only language features that affect the interfaces.
> > > > But generic types were already introduced
> > > > 
> > > > in JDK 6. So with JDK 6 you are on the safe side.
> > > > And some packages that are not in the intersetion
> > > > between Java and Android, 
> > > > 
> > > > you figure these out quickly.
> > > > 
> > > > The Android libraries byte code on the other hand
> > > > uses version 52.0, thats right. But then if you
> > > > stay in the JDK 6 for the non GUI
> > > > 
> > > > part, this doesn't mean I would recommend the
> > > > same for the GUI and Android specific part.
> > > > Maybe there you should profit from
> > > > 
> > > > the latest development. 
> > > > 
> > > > Am Mittwoch, 29. August 2018 01:42:28 UTC+2 schrieb Arne Vajhøj:
> > > > > On 8/28/2018 7:00 PM, bursejan@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > >                 I still try to develop
> > > > > > against JDK 6, so that I also can use my
> > > > > > code for example Android.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I don't understand that.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Android does not implement full runtime of any Java version.
> > > > > 
> > > > > And the language support is up to Java 8 in latest
> > > > > versions I believe.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Arne

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Java Version Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-28 13:17 -0700
  Re: Java Version Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2018-08-28 18:11 -0400
    Re: Java Version bursejan@gmail.com - 2018-08-28 16:00 -0700
      Re: Java Version bursejan@gmail.com - 2018-08-28 16:01 -0700
      Re: Java Version Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2018-08-28 19:40 -0400
      Re: Java Version Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2018-08-28 19:42 -0400
        Re: Java Version bursejan@gmail.com - 2018-08-28 16:56 -0700
          Re: Java Version bursejan@gmail.com - 2018-08-28 16:58 -0700
            Re: Java Version bursejan@gmail.com - 2018-08-28 17:06 -0700
              Re: Java Version bursejan@gmail.com - 2018-08-28 17:09 -0700
                Re: Java Version bursejan@gmail.com - 2018-08-28 17:28 -0700
                Re: Java Version bursejan@gmail.com - 2018-08-28 17:47 -0700
                Re: Java Version bursejan@gmail.com - 2018-08-28 17:53 -0700

csiph-web