Because the platform is changed you end up having to test everything. If you run into problems you now have developers trying to figure them out and get them fixed. This is a lot of wasted time and effort. The only benefit is for the developers. If the application is stable and in maintenance mode, there is NO reason to upgrade to a new version of Java.
If the application is evolving, changing, and being added to, then there would be reason to change to a newer version of Java. The developers would get a lot of benefits as would those maintaining the application. Doing new development on 1.4 is ludicrous but I know companies that do it because they just keep adding features and don't want to spend any time on retesting what already works. Remember, it is management that makes these decisions, not the developers. We would be happy to use 1.7 in production right now if we had our way. If 1.8 is on the table and we can get the code, we would even push it into production. But the reality is the developer rarely has any say in what language and which version is going to be used. And steering it one way or another is normally an effort in futility. On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 7:30 AM, Joseph Ottinger <[email protected]>wrote: > 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. > > -- Robert Casto www.robertcasto.com www.sellerstoolbox.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.
