Which is part of what Jigsaw, as I understand it, was supposed to address! Once we've got *versioned* modules, corba can go, and the old date/time stuff, and methods using enumeration, and any other of the things that have been long deprecated (or that should have been)
This is a sad day, it's the one imminent feature in Java that was of real benefit to the platform as a whole. What remains in the Java 8 spec that isn't just about playing catch-up with Scala, Groovy, JRuby, Mirah, etc? On 17 July 2012 22:44, phil swenson <[email protected]> wrote: > To me this is another sign that Java needs a reboot. It seems like > all the legacy and compatibility issues have become a really heavy > burden to bear. > > On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Jan Goyvaerts <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 10:29 PM, Fabrizio Giudici > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 21:05:02 +0200, Martijn Verburg > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >>> A tough decision and yes a little disappointing, especially since it > >>> would be very useful to have the JDK itself split up. However, given > >>> the extra engineering and community effort to have jigsaw fully > >>> supported by tools and containers, I think it was the right call, and > >>> at least they let us know over a year out. > >> > >> > >> Really, I don't know. As Jan said, the impact on the desktop side, for > non > >> industrial projects, is relevant. JavaFX 2 will stay mostly confined to > the > >> range of industrial apps. It's true that this final of the story has > been > >> already written in the past two years, but there could be still room for > >> doing something. > >> > >> Given that, what's now really the meaning of jigsaw? Not useful on the > >> server side, and I can say that industrial apps aren't affected by > 20-30-40 > >> MB more or less. > > > > > > That's a way of looking at it. > > > > I'm more thinking about who will care about Jigsaw's release two years > from > > now. Personally (so this is *my* opinion) I see only two groups of > people: > > the embedded- and the desktop developers. For the former I wonder whether > > the mainstream hardware won't allow to run a regular jvm by then. > > > > For the latter I wonder if that many will still ask for it by then. Yes, > > JavaFX is able to do many wonderful things. But so is the HTML5/CSS3/JS > > steamroller. Wonderful enough to be useful anyway. Not to mention what > it'll > > be able to do in another two years. Not that I'm pleased or enthusiastic > > about HTML5 & co. But I admit having grossly underestimated its momentum, > > support and consequences Java development. There is almost no reason > anymore > > to develop a (Java) client application. A modern web application looks as > > cool as a desktop application, runs also full screen, runs also offline, > > starts much faster and has virtually no system requirements and is easily > > distributed. > > > > It would have been nice to have something light and kicking ass running > the > > next generation JDK8 applet in your browser. But who's still reading this > > sentence when they read the word "applet" of the previous sentence ? :-) > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "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.
