Is JDK5.0 stable enough?

[metfan]

Could it be used for production environment now? Thanks.

 

[Peter Ashford]

Could it be used for production environment now? Thanks.

No. It will eat your computer.

 

[Larry Barowski]

Could it be used for production environment now? Thanks.

Many bugs from 1.4.x are fixed, while new bugs have
been introduced. We have seen fewer bugs that affect
our application (an IDE).

 

[Oscar kind]

Could it be used for production environment now? Thanks.

The JDK 5.0 doesn't exist. I'll assume you mean the JDK 1.5.0, baved on
the Java 5 specification...

IMHO, even the beta could be used for production (but that's hard to
explain to your boss).

 

[Chris Smith]

The JDK 5.0 doesn't exist. I'll assume you mean the JDK 1.5.0, baved on
the Java 5 specification...

You've picked up some bad information somewhere. There is a JDK 5.0,
and it's the same thing as the JDK 1.5.0 with a different name. See,
for example, http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/download.jsp where Sun says
"JDK 5.0 source code is available for researchers and others interested
in exploring the details of the JDK." Clearly, Sun considers it just
fine to refer to the JDK as version 5.0.

--
www.designacourse.com
The Easiest Way To Train Anyone... Anywhere.

Chris Smith - Lead Software Developer/Technical Trainer
MindIQ Corporation

 

[Scott Ellsworth]

Could it be used for production environment now? Thanks.

I have been holding off on that for a number of reasons. One big one
for us is the status of the Mac 1.5 port - it will likely ship with
their next OS release, which is not due for a number of months. By not
deploying to it, we make sure that our devs do not check in code that
requires it. (Devs can use any JDK or compiler they like, but the
nightlies run against Sun 1.4.x right now. We do a test build against
1.5 to make sure we do not accidentally use any 1.5 syntax.)

That said, our limited testing has been very positive. There are new
bugs, but they have not affected our code base.

Scott

 

[Oscar kind]

You've picked up some bad information somewhere. There is a JDK 5.0,
and it's the same thing as the JDK 1.5.0 with a different name.

My mistake. Thank's for correcting me.