P
Pep
Hi, is JDK 1.6 considered stable and should applications be upgraded
from JDK 1.5 to 1.6 if so?
TIA,
Pep
from JDK 1.5 to 1.6 if so?
TIA,
Pep
Pep said:Hi, is JDK 1.6 considered stable ..
..and should applications be upgraded
from JDK 1.5 to 1.6 if so?
Andrew said:I consider it stable (and do not speak for anyone else).
Huhh? What do you mean 'upgraded'? If you
are currently running them under 1.5 only, test
on a few 1.6 JRE's, and if it runs as you expect -
add 'JRE 1.6' to the 'compatible with' list*.
If there is 1.6 functionality that is of interest, it
might be possible to cause the app. to fall
back gracefully to accomodate the 1.5 JRE's.
This strategy provides the 'best of all worlds'
experience for the end user.
* If using web start, this would be as easy as
changing the version attribute of the java/j2se
element of the JNLP file - from 1.5*, to 1.5+.
--
Andrew Thompson
http://www.athompson.info/andrew/
Message posted via http://www.javakb.com
RVince said:Not sure of this, but I think 1.6 was primarily released as the latest,
stable 1.5.x but for Vista. Any comments on that statement guys? -R. Vince
RVince said:Not sure of this, but I think 1.6 was primarily released as the latest,
stable 1.5.x but for Vista. Any comments on that statement guys? -R. Vince
I use Java 6 exclusively unless a client orders me otherwise. (Platforms
like JME are an obvious exception.)
I can think of no reason to prefer an old version on platforms that
support the current release. Even if the target platform is an older
version, I use JDK 6 and cross-build to the earlier version. ("-target"
and "-Xbootclasspath" are your friends there.)
Pep said:[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]Message posted via http://www.javakb.com
Thanks. By upgrading I meant is there much mileage in moving our code
base to JDK 1.6.
So it's really a question of the benefits in doing this.
...If, for
instance, 1.6 doesnot resolve a whole host of bugs ..
...or similar benefits
Hi, is JDK 1.6 considered stable and should applications be upgraded
from JDK 1.5 to 1.6 if so?
Please trim text no longer immediately relevant
Andrew Thompson said:I still do not understand why you would want to
'move' to 1.6, rather than ensure the application
will run under either 1.5, *or* 1.6.
Lew said:The way I parse your statement it doesn't make any sense, so I must have
misunderstood.
Vista is another issue, but I sure don't see how it is relevant.
I still do not understand why you would want to
'move' to 1.6, rather than ensure the application
will run under either 1.5, *or* 1.6.
But if your application runs just fine* under 1.5,
and you only intend to support 'a version',
why 'move' it to 1.6 at all?
..
I can see very few, if the app. is only advertised to run
under one version, and the customers have that version.
Like what? The only things I can think of besides
bug fixes are..
- something linke a newer, better, packing mechanism
(probably thinking pack200 in Java 1.5), or
- new functionality - new classes, methods, API's.
What kind of 'benefits' are you expecting or hoping for?
Roedy said:I am having no troubles with it, but then I usually use it with
-target to some lower level.
It is basically the same compiler with bugs fixed and new features. If
you don't use the new features, normally the code should be even
better.
Well for instance moving from 1.4 to 1.5 provided better string
formatting.
Myself I am hoping for none really.
I just have a pair of
anal colleagues that will argue the cup is half empty just for the
hell of it. As senior developer I have the responsibility to decide
what our IT strategy is with this project. So if nobody is jumping up
from the community saying something like it really is a" must" due to
serious security bugs in 1.5 or similar then I have no intention of
moving up.
Pep said:Seems the consensus is that there is no viable reason to move up to
1.5 if we are not planning on using any newer features, which we are
not. So we'll stay on 1.5 for the forseeable future then, unless
another part of our company requires a move in the future.
~kurt said:Many developers include their own copy of the JRE with their software.
I never liked that idea much myself - seems silly to have a bunch of
JREs installed on the computer,
Hi, is JDK 1.6 considered stable and should applications be upgraded
from JDK 1.5 to 1.6 if so?
I use methods in the API introduced in 1.6 all the time without even
realizing that it's not available in 1.5. Right now, I'm not actively
looking at the 1.7 API and drooling, rubbing my hands together, dreaming
about taking advantage of these new methods. But when 1.7 comes out, I'm
sure I'll be unknowingly using 1.7-only methods too.
Arne Vajhøj said:It makes a lot of sense to me that the installer has the capability
to install the JRE if the users does not have one.
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.