🚀 go-pugleaf

Rich,
Thanks for the info - I'm starting the GUI-side of this project pretty much
from scratch, so it's no real problem for me to go w/ JB3 (little to no
conversion will be required), it's just a matter of convincing my client that
it's worth the $250 to get to JB3.  If you'll indulge my lack of JB3/Swing
knowledge a little further - it sounds like JB3 ships w/ JDK 1.1.8 - does
that allow me to use what you refer to as 'Real Swing'?  (I'm presuming that
1.1.8 isn't actually 1.2, right?)  Will JB3 support development/debugging w/
JDK 1.2?  (and do I actually want to use 1.2 vs 1.1.8?)

Thank You VERY Much for your help/info on this - it's turned out to be a
rather confusing subject!

Jim

Rich Wilkman wrote:

> Jim:
>
> Swing with 1.1.6 is most likely JFC 1.0 - 1.03 (classes in the com.sun
> packages).  The best argument you could make is that those are dead code
> threads.  No more fixes, ever.  Javasoft would like to forget the whole
> mess ever happened.
>
> Moving beyond 1.1.6 would probably mean moving to 1.1.8 and "real"
> Swing.  A bit of work, but it gets you on a more modern code thread.
> However it doesn't look like there's gonna be a 1.1.9 (all the work is
> really happening in the Java 2 space), and JB3 will get you there pretty
> fast (and even has a tool to migrate your source).
>
> -Rich
>
> Jim Stoll wrote:
> >
> > I'm embarking on a Swing project and currently have JB2 w/ JDK 1.1.6 -
> > are there compelling reasons (justified by the extra$$ to purchase JB3)
> > for using JDK 1.1.8 or 1.2 for Swing development?  (JB2, while
> > upgradable to newer JDK's, will only support debugging on the JDK 1.1.6
> > shipped w/ it, so it looks like it's JB2/1.1.6 or JB3...)
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Jim Stoll
>
> --
>
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> Rich Wilkman
> Quality Assurance Manager
> Borland JBuilder Team
>
> If you see something that looks like an opinion up there,
> it's mine and mine alone.
>
> Mail sent to me from the newsgroups won't bounce but will
> be ignored.  If I have time, I'll respond, but you  have
> a better chance if you confine your posts to the newsgroups
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=