News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Programming Language Rankings: June 2016. Parent comment

Re:Programming Language Rankings: June 2016 by lmm on Thursday July 21, 2016 @12:23PM (#12137887)
> We did consider (and regret) potentially leaving android behind, but we were (perhaps naively) hoping that something like retrolambda would suffice, or that android would catch up. In any case, it doesn't make a lot of sense to have 2.12 still support Java 6, since most of its features require Java 8 (those that don't, we first implemented in 2.11.x).

Presumably 2.11 won't be supported going forward? Or as someone who would like my libraries to work on android and doesn't particularly care about them being callable from Java 8, should I just stay on 2.11 indefinitely?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Programming Language Rankings: June 2016 by adriaanm on Thursday July 21, 2016 @03:01PM (#12139187)
Yes, if you're tied to Java 6, you're also tied to Scala 2.11. Why is the former version peg ok but not the latter? We do everything we can to enable 2.11.x maintenance by the community (and contributions are trending up!), as well as doing some of our own -- time permitting. If you'd like to get commercial support, we do offer that to our customers.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Programming Language Rankings: June 2016 by lmm on Friday July 22, 2016 @04:57AM (#12142452)
> Yes, if you're tied to Java 6, you're also tied to Scala 2.11. Why is the former version peg ok but not the latter?

a) Java 6 is forward binary compatible with later versions

b) Google has a reasonable excuse in terms of the Oracle lawsuit. Don't get me wrong, I'm not happy about Android being stuck on Java 6, but there are extenuating circumstances.

c) Scala 2.11 has issues that affect me and I want to see fixed. Java 6 doesn't, at least not that I've noticed. (If JVM 8 were necessary to the implementation of a Scala feature I cared about I would understand that, but as far as I can see it's irrelevant to my use cases)

[ Parent | on HN ]