My intent was to claim that the industry care about keeping up to date with things, as can be demonstrated by the evolution of adopted languages. Not that they care about Jigsaw per-se.
That would be a claim can't be easily demonstrated by citing industry trends. Then again, I still contend that there is no other proposed mechanism which would allow deprecated methods to truly be removed, and method signatures to be changed (both important aspects of keeping up to date), all without sacrificing backwards compatibility. On 20 July 2012 13:51, Josh Berry <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 8:42 AM, Kevin Wright <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Just look at long-term trends of book sales and job availability for > various > > programming languages. Java rose from nothing, and COBOL usage > continues to > > fall. This simply wouldn't be the case if people didn't care about > > upgrading, improving, and modernising their systems to take advantage of > new > > paradigms and techniques. > > That is one possible explanation. Another is that technologies with a > lot of money behind them get a lot of use. Yet another is that people > are willing to try anything, especially if a perceived expert is > pushing it. Or, heck, anyone that can say "it worked for me." This > last is particularly inviting, just going off people's propensities to > try oddball diets. > > Also, none of this addresses what I meant the citation to cover, which > is that industries are clamoring for a modular jvm. > > -- 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.
