[jsword-devel] Java 1.6

[DM Smith]

The dependency graph of JDOM is just wrong. At least for JSword. We certainly don't use StAX or XPath via JDOM. Just DOM and SAX. That's not to say that StAX wouldn't be good. For JSword, JDOM shouldn't drag in anything at all.

I'm not sure we need JDom at all in Java 5, which uses xerces rather than 1.4's crimson. IIRC, we needed JDOM because there was no way in Java 1.4 to create an XML Document object.


In Him,
	DM

On Sep 3, 2012, at 12:59 AM, Douglas Campos <qmx at qmx.me> wrote:

> Another advantage on going with 1.6 as minimum is the opportunity to use Stax/XML streaming APIs and get rid of JDOM (heinous dependency graph + slow)
> 
> On Aug 27, 2012, at 6:32 AM, Martin Denham wrote:
> 
>> Java support for Android is a bit confusing because Android Java (Dalvik) is based on Apache Harmony which conforms to almost all of Java 6.  However Dalvik uses its own class library built on a subset of Harmony which does not align to standard profiles (for example Swing is not supported). 
>> 
>> Android System Requirements (click link below Download button) specify that Android requires JDK 6, so if JSword builds with JDK 6 it should be okay for Android.
>> 
>> Regards
>> Martin
>> 
>> On 25 August 2012 21:43, Chris Burrell <chris at burrell.me.uk> wrote:
>> The one I was thinking of at the time would be the @Override annotation. It makes it clearer from the code that you are indeed implementing an interface in Java 6. Java 5 doesn't actually allow you to specify the annotation. So it's not a biggy, just very handy when you do massive refactors and you want to check you're implementing an interface and not just declaring another stand-alone method.
>> 
>> http://javamoods.blogspot.co.uk/2010/02/override-changes-in-java-6.html for more details.
>> 
>> Chris
>> 
>> 
>> On 25 August 2012 21:35, DM Smith <dmsmith at crosswire.org> wrote:
>> A few:
>> We want to support at least the last five years of popular operating systems (Windows, Mac, Linux, BSD, Android).
>>        Mac OS X of older vintages don't have Java 6.
>>        Java 7 is just out for the most recent Macs running the most recent OS. I've tested it and found no problems.
>>        The Android market is quite fragmented. I don't have a good handle on what level of features their Java supports.
>> 
>> We want to support older hardware. This is true in missionary circles with hand-me-down machines. And I still have an actively used older, perfectly good Mac that cannot run Java 6.
>> 
>> The libraries that we depend upon are at Java 5.
>> 
>> The last release was Java 1.4. I think it'd be good for the next release to be Java 5.
>> 
>> Regarding Java 6 and 7:
>> 
>> JSword runs just fine with a Java 6 jre.
>> 
>> I've also compiled JSword with Java 6 jdk and it compiles and runs just fine w/ Java 5 JREs. Perhaps a bit faster.
>> I haven't tested Java 7 yet, but I expect the same.
>> 
>> Are there any features of Java 6 or 7 that you feel would make JSword better?
>> 
>> In Him,
>>        DM
>> 
>> On Aug 25, 2012, at 3:00 PM, Chris Burrell <chris at burrell.me.uk> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi all
>>> 
>>> Any reason to stick with Java 1.5? We could upgrade to 1.6 or even Java 7...
>>> 
>>> Chris
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> jsword-devel mailing list
>>> jsword-devel at crosswire.org
>>> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/jsword-devel
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> jsword-devel mailing list
>> jsword-devel at crosswire.org
>> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/jsword-devel
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> jsword-devel mailing list
>> jsword-devel at crosswire.org
>> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/jsword-devel
> 
> -- qmx
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> jsword-devel mailing list
> jsword-devel at crosswire.org
> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/jsword-devel