On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 5:44 PM, Matthias Seidel <matthias.sei...@hamburg.de> wrote:
> Hi Damjan, > > I can only comment on a non-technical POV... > > Am 09.07.2017 um 14:53 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic: > > Hi > > > > Currently our Java policy [1] mandates a baseline of Java 5, which was > > released in 2004, and was EOL from 2008; even paid Oracle customers > stopped > > getting updates in 2015 [2]. > > That page was last updated in 2008, so it might definitely need an > overhaul. ;-) > > > There are many language and class library improvements in later versions > of > > Java that we would benefit from in AOO, and if there are no objections, I > > would like to increase the minimum version to 7, if not 8. > > At least the OS/2 port still relies on Java 6 > [http://trac.netlabs.org/java]. > But I think the support is still at beta stage... > > What is the status of our OS/2 support? The language features are the most important, and it should be possible to use Java 7 language features while only using Java <= 5 APIs, and build into Java 5 compatible class files, as long as javac (ie. the JDK) is from Java >= 7. But even if it isn't, since class files are the same on all platforms, it should be possible to jerryrig a fake "javac" on OS/2, that compiles the java file on a remote javac 7, and then downloads the Java 5 compatible class file. > > Java 7 would give us the badly needed try-with-resources feature, better > > type inference for generics, and Java 8: lambdas and method references, > > better java.util collections and lambda-based APIs for them, unsigned > > integer arithmetic, etc. > > > > The only possible downside I see is that the few alternative JVMs that do > > exist, tend to only work with older version of Java, for example, the > > Apache Harmony class library used in earlier versions of Android only > > supported Java 5, GNU Classpath also 5, CacaoVM only supports 6 [3]. > > Alternative Java implementation aren't relevant to desktop users > > (x86/amd64/sparc) any more, since OpenJDK provides free/open-source JVMs > > for those, but other platforms and more exotic use cases do need them, > eg. > > the ARM JVM is only available from Oracle as a commercial product, and > the > > BugVM project that compiles Java to native code for the iPhone, uses the > > Harmony-based Android library. > > > > Having said that, there are ways to compile most Java 7 code into Java 5 > > classes. For example try-with-resources compiles into a normal > > try-catch-finally, with calls to the Exception.addSuppressed() API that > > only exists on Java 7, but the class file can be changed to eliminate > them; > > I already have a tool that does this. So I guess it's only 8 that's > > controversial, as it's lambdas compile into "invokevirtual" instructions, > > which didn't exist prior to Java 7. > > > > Anyway I am proceeding with (uncommitted) development under the > assumption > > at least 7 is ok, and will revisit with 8 if possible. Please object soon > > if you do :-). > > I still have problems to build AOO for Windows with Java 8. > One user mentioned a problem with JavaDoc due to an API change in Java 8. > [http://blog.joda.org/2014/02/turning-off-doclint-in-jdk-8-javadoc.html] > > You must be building the 4.1 branches. Trunk has been building perfectly with Java 8 for years, since I patched the Javadoc issues we had. > > Regards, Matthias > > > > > Damjan > > > > References: > > [1] https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Policies/Java_Usage > > [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_version_history > > [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Java_virtual_machines > > > > >
