On May 31, 2011, at 5:44 AM, Ricky Clarkson wrote:

> You may be overstating the effort/cash required, and understating the 
> benefits.

There certainly are benefits to moving on that go beyond just developer value.. 
however if the move imposes a cost and there is no perceived business value....

BTW, there are still people using 1.1.8.....

Regards,
Kirk

> 
> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 12:24 AM, Steven Herod <[email protected]> wrote:
>> The opposition to moving beyond 1.4.x would be mainly the cost.
>> 
>> You have a working application which is stable, you are expending
>> minimal effort maintaining, and suddenly someone is proposing you
>> spend effort/cash to give developers a warm fuzzy feeling and the end
>> user no actual visible benefit.
>> 
>> Hard to justify.  Easier to wait until the app is retired.
>> 
>> On May 30, 9:57 pm, Ricky Clarkson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> The semantics are pretty clear, as you get compile errors when you get
>>> things wrong.
>>> 
>>> Java developers *were* used to unsafe casts.  I'm regularly in ##java
>>> on freenode IRC and see fewer and fewer people trying to use untyped
>>> collections.  It still happens, though mainly by accident.
>>> 
>>> I've seen some new Java code using untyped Vectors and Hashtables
>>> recently, but a) the [ir]responsible developers just left b) that
>>> would have happened no matter what Java had done short of removing
>>> Vector and Hashtable.
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Skype: ricky_clarkson
>>> UK phone (forwards to Skype): 0161 408 5260
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 1:13 AM, Casper Bang <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> It's quite elegant that in general if I update a dependency and that
>>>>> dependency has switched from raw types to generics, I generally have
>>>>> nothing to do.  With the .NET approach I would have to marshal between
>>>>> old and new collection types constantly.
>>> 
>>>> Yes but at least the semantics would be clear up front right there in
>>>> the type-system and you'd avoid various pitfalls (Java developers are
>>>> used to unsafe casts and unsafe array variance) as well as pave the
>>>> way for a deprecation/migration strategy. Sometimes something must die
>>>> in order to leave the way for something new, or all we get are zombies.
>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>>>> "The Java Posse" group.
>>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>>>> [email protected].
>>>> For more options, visit this group 
>>>> athttp://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>> 
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "The Java Posse" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>> [email protected].
>> For more options, visit this group at 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "The Java Posse" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> [email protected].
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
> 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The 
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.

Reply via email to