Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Java is still available at zero-cost

blog.joda.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 164 posts

Re: Java is still available at zero-cost

#121

Post by mnm1 »

arthurcolle wrote: post #116
mnm1 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's insane, a complete waste of time, and a sign that the software is turning to garbage, releasing major api breaking changes just for their own goals, but to meet the goals of the user. Same goes for frameworks to a lesser extent. If one can't point out any real advantage of upgrading to a major version other than the developers want you to, that's the sign of broken software that's about to be insecure because th…

Part of the issue here is likely the pressure that dev teams feel to be outputting something rather than nothing at all. There definitely seems to be a huge overemphasis on quantity over quality.

Yup. I'm convinced this is the reason 95% of updates exist today. If it ain't broke don't fix it has been totally forgotten and it shows in today's broken ass software.

Re: Java is still available at zero-cost

#122

Post by lowry »

The author exposes his agenda by downplaying Oracle's decisions that impact Java availability to businesses and FUDing other options, e.g. he says that RedHat will push security fixes to OpenJDK first and repackage afterward, as if it was something bad.

Re: Java is still available at zero-cost

#123

Post by pjmlp »

agibsonccc wrote: post #119
pjmlp wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They didn't fully merged OpenJDK, just selected parts of it, across multiple Android versions. Compatibility is still kind of broken. It isn't possible to guarantee that any random Java library is usable on Android.

Yes not all of it - there are still android specific bits yet. Enough of it is openjdk though.

And given how updates work....

Re: Java is still available at zero-cost

#124

Post by orbitingpluto »

mamcx wrote: post #54
euske wrote: post #43

Honest question: How often do people upgrade their production language? Me: once in a decade, maybe. I'm still perfectly happy (and productive) with C# 3.5, Java 7 and Python 2. I'm grudgingly moving forward because the old toolchains are being deprecated now, but my codes aren't significantly improved because of a few fancy idioms available in a new language, and it barely affects the design decisions. Upgrading you…

I was burned, badly, when try to port a huge ERP from .NET 1.1 to 2.? (if I remember the numbers correctly). Other projects get the slowdon, but that was truly a nightmare. That my brain trauma make forget much of it. After that, I move very very fast. I prefer to hit "small" pains in short-term that try to do a huge jump later. This mean that as long as I'm coding in a project (I'm contractor and do freelancing) I u…

That is bonkers that someone signed off on a huge project with .NET 1.1. Early .NET is so off. It feels like two teams of programmers at Microsoft weren't talking to each other but working on features for the same language.

Re: Java is still available at zero-cost

#125

Post by scarface74 »

Skinney wrote: post #114
scarface74 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft is known for s lot of things, but breaking backwards compatibility and short term support aren’t two of them.

Microsoft broke backwards compatibility when they introduced generics in .NET 2.0. Java, on the other hand, is still getting flac for refusing the break backwards compatibility to introduce reified generics.

How did generics break backwards compatibility?

Re: Java is still available at zero-cost

#126

Post by jerven »

MBCook wrote: post #60
peanutz454 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not sure I completely understand the implications of this. But, if OpenJDK is the reference implementation, and as long as someone is going to maintain Java 11, there really isn't much to worry. I worked for a company that completely relies on Java. They also relied on Apache, so they had on their roles two developers that wrote code for Apache and Tomcat. Making wild guesses here but - if OpenJDK project gets 3…

The question is, and we won’t know the answer until this is been going on for a while, how many releas(es) back will continue to get security updates from the community. Will they decide on arbitrary long-term releases? Maybe 11 and 15 and then 19 get three years of support? Or will the community extend the length of security patch releases by some sort of fixed margin, say 6 to 12 months, and leave it at that. Right…

We know that RedHat is aiming to support Java 11 LTS for a minimum of 6 years and OpenJDK8 till the end of life of RedHat7.x

Source https://access.redhat.com/articles/3409141

Re: Java is still available at zero-cost

#127

Post by jerven »

MBCook wrote: post #67
EdwardDiego wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The biggest issue I've met with the ABI issue is frameworks (Spring etc.) that emit bytecode at runtime. I tried upgrading our project to Java 10 and Spring 4 and Camel (I can't remember the version) were the main issues because of their runtime generated proxies. The fix is to upgrade Spring to Spring 5, but that's a whole bunch of other work, and I'm unsure of the scope of work to upgrade Camel. All that said, Java…

I remember running into an issue sort of like that with Struts (IIRC). I could use Java 8 anywhere in the codebase except on JSP files because Struts would choke on the new bytecodes it didn’t know were now valid.

Actually it works if you use a recent eclipse ejc for compiling the JSPs. i.e. tomcat 8+ will be ok with such feature use like default methods.

Re: Java is still available at zero-cost

#128

Post by jerven »

MBCook wrote: post #74
agibsonccc wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Use openjdk instead. By default on linux, that's what will continue to happen. You won't really be impacted by this.

There’s no need to use Open JDK. If that’s your preference or you have some other reason (like the fact it’s probably pre-installed in a Linux distribution) there’s nothing wrong with it. But there’s absolutely no need for a developer to switch off of Oracle unless you absolutely cannot move to Java 9 or newer.

Java 9 is already no longer supported. If you haven't moved yet go directly to 11.

As after 11 there are no features in OracleJDK that are not in OpenJDK I would think moving to the vendor supported (Open)JDK on your linux system is the smart default thing to do.

Re: Java is still available at zero-cost

#129

Post by jerven »

MBCook wrote: post #75
didip wrote: post #15

I am not well-verse in Java world and curious about one thing. The valuable part of Oracle JDK is the GC. For example G1 is only going to be available on OpenJDK 9. What if there's a new GC being developed, will OpenJDK have the new GC?

My understanding is that Open JDK is where all Java language development takes place now. It’s only some special enterprise features that aren’t part of the language itself that are restricted to the paid version of the Oracle JDK.

Were (past tense) there is nothing in Oracle JDK 11 that is not in OpenJDK 11.

Re: Java is still available at zero-cost

#130

Post by jerven »

tannhaeuser wrote: post #104
scarface74 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

.Net Core. It’s maintained by a company that actually knows how to support a platform.

The alternative is, and always has been, a language and runtime lib that is spec'd in the open and has multiple implementations to choose from. Though choices have become limited. Only C, C++, and JavaScript seem to fit the bill AFAICS.

And Java is moving into this world as well. It always had multiple implementations but mostly people used the Sun and then Oracle binaries. Now they are saying get your implementation from your linux vendor (e.g. gcc like) or pay us (intel C compiler like) if you want long term support.
Post reply on HN