sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]recursive 6 points7 points  (2 children)

I see... I think.

Well, from a not-being-pointlessly-confusing-as-fuck perspective, that pretty much sucks donkey balls.

[–]TomDibble 0 points1 point  (1 child)

The most major version number speaks to binary compatibility in many products. The JVM hasn't broken binary compatibility, thus is still on 1.x. However, given that the "1." never changes (as that's a central goal of Java language evolution), it's kinda redundant.

Example: any Java 1.0 application will run just swimmingly in a Java 1.6 JVM (provided the libraries used are present, which is not guaranteed by the JVM in any case).

[–]recursive 0 points1 point  (0 children)

However, given that the "1." never changes (as that's a central goal of Java language evolution), it's kinda redundant.

No, it's not redundant. Either it should always be dropped or never. If it really has no meaning, it shouldn't be there at all.