People don't care about performance. They want safety. Unless we're
talking automobiles, because people are idiots.

On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 7:21 AM, Jess Holle <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hmm...
>
> No user benefits like greatly improved JVM performance between 1.4.2 and
> 1.6?
>
> On 5/30/2011 10:24 PM, Steven Herod 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.
>
>



-- 
Joseph B. Ottinger
http://enigmastation.com

-- 
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