Slashdot Mirror
Java 1.5.0 Now Officially Java 5.0
Quantum Jim writes "In a move which out-does Netscape's one-version number skip and Winamp's two-numbers skip, Sun has announced that the upcoming Java2 release will be marketed as version 5.0, skipping three-and-a-half numbers. Can version 6.022E23 be far behind? Thanks to David Flanagan for the heads-up."
Sun already jumped 1.2 and called it "2".
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
6.022E23 is Avogadro's number, the number of atoms in a mole of an element.
Last time I checked, 3 & 2 == 2 (11 & 10 == 10, if you prefer binary), so if "any boolean logitician [sic] will tell you that the version number should be 6," we are in serious trouble...
What about MS Word. It went from version 2 to 6.
Emacs 1.12 to 13.0. Like Java, its not a real version skip, just the initial "1." got dropped because it seemed superfluous if it was never getting updated.
I believe Oracle started by releasing version 2.0
"to make it sound like it had improvements from the first version"
Sun's done it before too: Solaris "7" is actually 2.7
Moll.
What you hear in the ear, preach from the rooftop Matthew 10.27b
No, it was SunOS 5.7 = Solaris 2.7 = Solaris 7 actually. Both a rebranding and a version jump. Remember that SunOS 5.6 = Solaris 2.6.
The first release of Windows NT, as architected by Dave Cutler of VAX/VMS fame, started at 3.1. The fact that 16bit Windows was at 3.1 at that point is irrelevent. NT was a complete rewrite, hence NT = New Technology. Therefore, it should really have been released as 1.0.
- Oisin
PGP KeyId: 0x08D63965
Not at all.
The 2.N -series is the SunOS versioning series. 2.7, 2.8, current 2.9 etc.
The 7, 8 and 9 series are Solaris (Which is NOT the same as SunOS).
Solaris is a collection of a lot of stuff, like window managers, lots of software etc.
So, Solaris 9 contains SunOS 2.9, but it's definitely not the same.
Probable impossibilities are to be preferred to improbable possibilities.
Aristotele
Actually the original poster is correct, Sun has done it before.
....
Solaris went..
2.0
2.1
2.6
7
I realise the underlying SunOS continues the consistent numbering. But Solaris did officially skip several numbers.
I think this is the interview you are referring to. It is an interesting read for Java and C# developers.
In binary representation of integers, yes, (3 & 2) == 2. But if we're just working with boolean true (>0) and false (0) values, AND behaves like multiplication and OR behaves like addition. Sure, it's not exactly the same thing, but 0*0=0, 0*1=0, 1*0=0, 1*1=1 and 0+0=0, 0+1=1, 1+0=1, 1+1=2 (2 can still be considered "true").
Because everybody hated Winamp 3, and so it was more-or-less abandoned and they continued working on Winamp 2 for a while, eventually getting up to something like 2.9. If they had named it Winamp 3.1, people would have said, "That's Winamp 3!! WINAMP 3 IS TEH SUCK!!" and not downloaded it. So they decided to do a whole different number. Nullsoft being the llama-whipping company that they are, they decided to do 2+3 instead of 4.
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." -- Hanlon's Razor
Windows 95 = Windows 4.00.950 on MSDOS 7
Windows 98 = Windows 4.10.1998 on MSDOS 7
Windows 2000 = Windows NT 5.00.2195
For completeness...
Windows XP = Windows NT 5.1.2600
Come on, out-pedant me...
-- *~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds...
"Word for Windows" went from v2 to v6, but that was because the previous version of "Word for DOS" was v5.
deus does not exist but if he does
The first release of Windows NT, as architected by Dave Cutler of VAX/VMS fame, started at 3.1.
That's because it was called Microsoft OS/2 before MS and IBM went separate ways. IBM called it's new release of OS/2 for 2.0 and MS went with 3.1 for NT. See wikipedia.
Exactly. This isn't a version number "skip"; it's a version number "strip".
The second digit becomes the first and the third the second. This is perfectly in line with accepted norms when you consider the improvements of 1.4.2 over 1.4.1. For minor increments, Sun had to resort to seriously odd numbers like 1.4.2_04.
Makes sense to me. The "2" in J2SE is unfortunate, but at this point the numericity of that character is dead. J2SE, J2EE and J2ME are just brands, not versions.
For those who don't know what Slackware version skip he's refering to, it was 4.0 to 7.0. Pat Volkerding himself admitted he was doing the version inflation because he kept on hearing from potential users that RH was "Linux 7" while Slackware was "only version 4" so he renumbered it to match more or less the numbers that most everyone else is using. (Well, Debian is still 3.0 :-) )
it's not quite that bad, but at the same time, it's worse...
Solaris 2.6 was SunOS 5.6, and Solaris 7 is SunOS 5.7
So you have -
SunOS 5.6, Solaris 2.6
SunOS 5.7, Solaris 7
Advanced users are users too!
The ratio of 1:1.618 is known as the Golden Ratio
Slashdot Eds Link Anonymous Posts With Logged Posts
They Are Vermin Feeding On Each Other's Feces.
I Hate \.
Perhaps had they just kept right on calling it Pascal,
They had. Delphi and Kylix do not name the language, they name the environment. The language in which you can program using Delphi and Kylix is Object Pascal, which is not exactly Pascal, but Pascal enhanced to work with objects.
There is officially a Leisure Suit Larry 4, subtitled "The Missing Floppies". http://pc.ign.com/objects/621/621156.html
Possibly also because Netscape 5 is still sitting around on mozilla.org - the code that actually was open sourced and discarded.
Appearently some people inside Netscape actually wanted to release 5 based on the old code, and concurrently work on 6 based on the new code (NGLayout/Gecko). See interview on ars technica with Scott Collins.
just being anal,
:
int i = ((Integer) container.get(indx));
would not work
should have been
int i = ((Integer) container.get(indx)).intValue();
Siggy Say, Siggy Do
Without generics, boxing and unboxing is required for collections, because the collection needs a boxed object.
A good implementation of generics eliminates the boxing and unboxing overhead, because the collection can work directly with the underlying raw types.
I don't know about Java, but in C#, a generic collection of ints is about 10 times faster than the non-generic version, all because boxing/unboxing is eliminated.
megaman did this.. they got to 1,2,3...X and then just started fresh and went X1, X2 etc.
what is nailchipper?
But the C++ and C# implementations which escape this defect have their own--everytime you instantiate a parameterized type (template or generic), under the hood it has to create another copy of your code--which takes up memory. (I don't know if this is true of Ada).
In the interview you're refering to and one of the replies to you links to, the C# designer tries to claim that C++'s are untyped because type errors aren't detected until linking or at least a later stage of compiling, but that seems too far--link time is still a long way before run time. The type system may not itself may not be checking for compliance, but it still gets checked before an executable gets made. The error messages are confusing, but I think that's just because STL is confusing.
So, you trade the extra permissiveness (albeit safe permissiveness) and CPU efficiency with detrimented memory efficiency--more copies of the code are used.
And both Java and C# try to wave their hands "Just in Time! Just in Time!" claiming that they can eliminate any performance problems. Who knows?
I still like C#'s generics better than Java's, so far, but the C# ones aren't better in all possible ways. Better still is something like Standard ML, which has polymorphic types which work like Java Generics (except that I am certain that Standard ML gets the full performance boost from parameterized types, not to mention that it doesn't have to check for Null Pointer exceptions as Java and C# must and as C++ fails to), and functors which are similar to C# Generics and (sort of) C++ templates.
Then again, take this with a grain of salt, I don't have that much experience with C# (er...CLI) generics. Maybe they're more powerful than I realize. Come to think of it, has Microsoft relased a .Net Framework with Generics yet? Back when I was playing with C# it lacked those. But Mono has them so perhaps I should investigate.
Still, you shouldn't go around talking about Java Generics being strictly syntactic relative to C++ templates. Did you notice how C++ templates like to be headers? The compiler basically just substitutes in the full text of the template every time you instantiate it. C# is a little smarter, not much.
If you like that, it's worth noting that the version numbers of Knuth's masterpieces TeX and METAFONT are converging to pi and e, respectively.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Actually, that's only an approximation.
Sorry to nitpick, but 1:(1 + sqrt(5))/2 is the Golden Ratio.
Sorry, but you get it yourself wrong...
Solaris is the "distribution" and is versioned 2.5, 2.6, 7, 8, 9.
SunOS is the kernel and is versioned 5.5, 5.6, 5.7, 5.8, 5.9.
So, Solaris 9 contains SunOS 5.9 (not 2.9!)
Although this is J2SE v5, or Java 2 Platform Standard Edition 5.0 to give it a longer name.
So we've had JDK1.1, J2SDK1.2, J2SDK1.3, J2SDK1.4 and now we get J2SDK5.0.
Read the article...
This isn't Java5, it is Java 2 v5
Christ, as a degree holding classicist, I can't let you get away with two sentences with that many errors in them.
XP is a long used symbol for Christ, dating back to some of the earliest christian artwork, with the symbols pronounced Chi-Rho in Roman. We could say the year of XP is 1.
Let's take it one at a time:
XP is a long used symbol for Christ
XP is not a symbol for Christ. It is the first two letters of the word "Christ" in Greek.
dating back to some of the earliest christian artwork
Dating back actually to the battle of the Milvian bridge, where the would-be Roman emperor Constantine fought the would-be Roman emperor Maxentius. The actual story of why they were both fighting goes back to Diocletian's division of the empire to a system of 2 senior and 2 junor rulers (2 Augusti and 2 caesars). Constantine saw the sign "XP" in the sky on his way to the bridge with his army (accounts vary), and he interpreted it to mean that if he had his soldiers paint XP on their shields, christ would help him win. Some accounts include that he heard the words "In hoc signo vinces", or "In this sign, conquer".
with the symbols pronounced Chi-Rho in Roman
No, no, no, no! Chi and Rho are GREEK letters. Not to mention ROMAN is not a language. Latin is the language spoken by the Roman people. X and P (Chi and Rho) are the first two letters of XPISTOS, chi-rho-iota-sigma-tau-omicron-sigma, or the Greek translation of the hebrew word for messiah, "one annointed by god".
We could say the year of XP is 1
Or, we could say that the year of XP (i.e. the year that it became significantly important) is 312 A.D., the year of the battle at the milvian bridge.
~Will
sig?