Cobol - Re: Java compatibility issues (WAS: MF having issues?)

Author

Re: Java compatibility issues (WAS: MF having issues?)

Sergey Kashyrin

2006-03-02, 6:55 pm

Oliver,

>
> Not sure what you're refering to.

You gave your answer:

> Java 1.5 introduces 23 incompabilities (including the Drag and Drop, and
> "enum" keywords mentioned above), Java 1.4 introduced 7 incompabitilities,
> 1.3 introduced 16, etc.

That's more than enough to have a problems.
Of course all of that is not that bad if you dealing with server-side or
independent application.

But if you writing an applet which suppose to work in any browser under any
plugin, you'll get a huge headache.
1.0 -> 1.1 - did not work at all.
1.1 -> 1.2 - it was the most smooth transition. at least it was more
differences (and adjustments) between MS JVM and SUN 1.1 and of course a lot
of different bugs in each version of 1.1 (IBM 1.1.6, SUN1.1.7 with SYMC JIT,
etc...)
1.2 -> 1.3 - a lot of security classes has changed their packages :-)) - you
are pushed to dynamically load your JVM-specific wrappers :-))
1.3 -> 1.4 - default behavior of keyboard input has changed, so your 1.3
code just works incorrectly in 1.4. You have to add additional call for EACH
(!!!) visual component (each Panel etc). Of course you have to do that
dynamically. Imagine the number of places in a program you have to
correct...
etc.

After all of that SUN's "pure java certification" sounds like a big joke
:-))

I'm not a Windows lover but .NET was initially done much better. Java 1.5 is
just an attempt to catch the train. I think really .NET pushed developers of
Java to do what they did in 1.5

Regards,
Sergey

"Oliver Wong" <owong@castortech.com> wrote in message
news:KkENf.11720$dg.5162@clgrps13...
> [post re-ordered]
>
> "James J. Gavan" <jgavandeletethis@shaw.ca> wrote in message
> news:ARvNf.83587$sa3.6227@pd7tw1no...
>
> You bet.
>
>
>
> Not sure what you're refering to.
>
> The two biggest version compatibility issue I'm aware of is the
> introduction of the "assert" keyword in 1.4, and the "enum" keyword in
> 1.5. If you had a variable or method called "assert" or "enum" in a 1.3
> program, you'd have to rename that variable or method to something else if
> you were to recompile with a new compiler. I've never named a variable or
> method "assert" or "enum", and in all the code I've maintained written by
> someone else, there was never a variable or method named "assert" or
> "enum", so I never had to worry about this problem. Note that Java is case
> sensitive, so a variable called "Enum" or "ENUM" would not need to be
> renamed.
>
> Other than that, all the other incompatibilities seem, to me, trivially
> minor. Sun has a list of them on their page, at
> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/compatibility.html, and the compatibilities
> issues seem to almost always be related to source code depending on
> undocumented features (or depending on bugs in previous implementations).
> For example:
>
> <quote>
> Drag and Drop - Previously, the only drag and drop (DnD) protocol
> supported on X11 was the Motif DnD protocol. In 5.0, the XDND protocol is
> also supported, and the Motif DnD protocol has been reimplemented to not
> depend on the Motif library. It's possible that regressions might be
> caused by the difference between the new Motif DnD protocol implementation
> and one provided by the Motif library. However, since the Motif library's
> implementation is buggy, it's believed that the new implementation is at
> least as high in quality, as well as better supported.
> </quote>
>
> This again, is something so obscure that I've never had to worry about,
> and never even knew about until I read it today to provide some references
> for this post.
>
> Java 1.5 introduces 23 incompabilities (including the Drag and Drop, and
> "enum" keywords mentioned above), Java 1.4 introduced 7 incompabitilities,
> 1.3 introduced 16, etc.
>
> As you can see, these numbers are relatively small, and include even
> the most (IMHO) insignificant incompability issues. I've personally never
> had a problem with forward or backwards compability with Java.
>
> - Oliver

Howard Brazee

2006-03-06, 6:55 pm

On Mon, 06 Mar 2006 14:35:36 GMT, "Oliver Wong" <owong@castortech.com>
wrote:

> Yes, I think I understand what all of these code snippets do, though the
>"truthtable" one threw me off at first until I realized you were using a
>vector of bits.

Not exactly intuitive though. CoBOL programmers should learn to use
those snippets, they are useful, but I know some who would have a hard
time maintaining that code and could not have written it.

Howard Brazee

2006-03-09, 6:55 pm

On Wed, 8 Mar 2006 16:20:25 -0700, "Frank Swarbrick"
<Frank.Swarbrick@efirstbank.com> wrote:

>
>Have you ever known an old one?

Let me get back to you on that in a few decades.

Sponsored Links