Are you all using java 5?

Question

I am still using java 1.4 but does everyone else use java 5?
I was told that there is no need to update to java 5, since 1.4 is used in most companies anyway

Answer 1

> > I just made a Vector in 1.5 with:
>>
Vector v = new Vector();
Vector is a bit out of date, and it's generally better to declare your variable type as a List.
Program to an interface, not an implementation
> The compiler can optionally generate a warning on
this that it is not a generic type. Then the compiler
compiles it as if is was coded as:
Vector<Object> v = new Vector<Object>();
The compiler only compiles it that way if you write it that way. The use of generics is assistance only for the compiler. The compiler doesn't "add" types for you.
Vector v1 = new Vector();
v1.add(new Object());      // unchecked/unsafe operation
Vector<Object> v2 = new Vector<Object>();
v2.add(new Object());      // no warning
> The benefit of using generic types is that it
eliminates typecasting when retrieving elements:
There are other benefits as well; e.g., the type-checking mentioned above.
> Vector<Integer> v=new Vector<Integer>();
>
v.add(new Integer(1));
v.add(new Integer(2));
v.add(new Integer(3));
v.add(new Integer(4));
Let's not forget about varargs and autoboxing... ;o)
List<Integer> numbers = Arrays.asList(1, 2, 3, 4);
> in Java 1.4:
>
System.out.println( ( (Integer)(v.elementAt(2))).intValue() );
Why so verbose? In 1.4:
System.out.println(v.get(2));And in 1.5:
System.out.println(v.get(2));Not much difference there.
> Or use [i]forall
for(Integer i : v)
System.out.println(i.intValue());I think Sun refers to it as a "foreach", but that's just quibbling. But again, why the extraneous method call? Save yourself some typing and keep your code clean, especially since you're using the new syntax:
for (int i : v) {
    System.out.println(i);
}~