Java 1.5.0 Now Officially Java 5.0 534
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."
not even the first time (Score:5, Informative)
Where does the 2 come into this? (Score:3, Informative)
TWW
For non-physics people: (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Winamp didn't skip version 4 (Score:3, Informative)
Re:For non-physics people: (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Other Famous Version Number Skips (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Whoa (Score:3, Informative)
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.
Oracle (Score:3, Informative)
"to make it sound like it had improvements from the first version"
Re:Other Famous Version Number Skips (Score:3, Informative)
Moll.
Re:Bread cocks (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Other Famous Version Number Skips (Score:4, Informative)
- Oisin
Re:Other Famous Version Number Skips (Score:2, Informative)
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.
Re:Other Famous Version Number Skips (Score:2, Informative)
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.
Re:Strongly Typed Container Classes (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Winamp didn't skip version 4 (Score:3, Informative)
Re: For non-physics people: (Score:4, Informative)
The formal definition of a mole is that it's the number of atoms in 12 grams of the isotope Carbon-12. The molecular weight of atoms as listed on a periodic table represent the average mass of a mole of the element in naturally occurring proportions. In the case of Carbon, small amounts of the 13C and 14C isotopes result in an average mass slightly above 12.
Re:Winamp didn't skip version 4 (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Strongly Typed Container Classes (Score:5, Informative)
Pedant time... (Score:5, Informative)
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...
Re:Other Famous Version Number Skips (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Other Famous Version Number Skips (Score:1, Informative)
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 [wikipedia.org].
Version *strip* not skip. (Score:4, Informative)
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.
Re:Other Famous Version Number Skips (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Solaris (Score:3, Informative)
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
Re:Other Famous Version Number Skips (Score:5, Informative)
Re:at least there not doing what borland did! (Score:2, Informative)
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.
Leisure Suit Larry ^_^ (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Other Famous Version Number Skips (Score:2, Informative)
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 [arstechnica.com] on ars technica with Scott Collins.
Re:For non-physics people: (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Strongly Typed Container Classes (Score:3, Informative)
int i = ((Integer) container.get(indx));
would not work
should have been
int i = ((Integer) container.get(indx)).intValue();
Re:Strongly Typed Container Classes (Score:2, Informative)
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.
Re:Pedant time... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:versions of tomorrow (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Strongly Typed Container Classes (Score:2, Informative)
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.
Re:Winamp didn't skip version 4 (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Pedant time... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Other Famous Version Number Skips (Score:1, Informative)
Sorry to nitpick, but 1:(1 + sqrt(5))/2 is the Golden Ratio.
Re:Other Famous Version Number Skips (Score:2, Informative)
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!)
Re:java -version (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Winamp didn't skip version 4 (Score:2, Informative)
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.
Re:Don't you see the pattern? (Score:3, Informative)
Read the article...
This isn't Java5, it is Java 2 v5
Re:Other Famous Version Number Skips (Score:4, Informative)
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