News Stay informed about the latest enterprise technology news and product updates.

Java 9 will finally give the term 'deprecated' meaning

I’m not sure if I’m alone on this opinion, but it sure seems to me that the deprecation of the finalize method has been given way too much press. I can’t recall this much fervor over method deprecation since they blacklisted the java.util.Date() constructor and told everyone to start using a GregorianCalendar instead.

Java methods deprecated meaning

One does not simply stop calling deprecated methods

Giving the term ‘deprecated’ meaning

Whenever deprecated Java methods become news, I always like to troll the language gods over the fact that even though methods get deprecated, the underlying code never actually gets removed from the API, and as a result, lazy developers just keep using it, deprecation warnings be damned.

Previous rantings from TheServerSide about deprecated meaning nothing 

In a recent blog post, entitled Deprecation of Object.finalize(), Oracle Technical Staff Principal Stuart Marks set the record straight not only on what was being deprecated in Java 9, but which deprecated methods were actually being pruned from the API as well. Here’s the pertinent excerpt from his article:

The following six APIs were deprecated in Java SE 8, and they have been removed from Java SE 9:

  1. java.util.jar.Pack200.Packer.addPropertyChangeListener
  2. java.util.jar.Pack200.Unpacker.addPropertyChangeListener
  3. java.util.logging.LogManager.addPropertyChangeListener
  4. java.util.jar.Pack200.Packer.removePropertyChangeListener
  5. java.util.jar.Pack200.Unpacker.removePropertyChangeListener
  6. java.util.logging.LogManager.removePropertyChangeListener

In addition, in Java SE 9, about 20 methods and six modules have been deprecated with forRemoval=true, indicating our intent to remove them from the next major Java SE release. Some of the classes and methods to be removed include:

  • java.lang.Compiler
  • Thread.destroy
  • System.runFinalizersOnExit
  • Thread.stop(Throwable)

The modules deprecated for removal are the following:

  1. java.activation
  2. java.corba
  3. java.transaction
  4. java.xml.bind

So yes, we are getting serious about removing stuff!

Deprecated value != deprecated meaning

So I guess that will shut me up for a while. They’re getting around to pruning the API and getting rid of the deprecated methods. All I ask is that they don’t prune away that deprecated java.util.Date constructor. I’m still writing code that uses it.

You can follow Stuart Marks on Twitter: @stuartmarks
You can follow me as well: @cameronmcnz

Join the conversation


Send me notifications when other members comment.

By submitting you agree to receive email from TechTarget and its partners. If you reside outside of the United States, you consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Privacy

Please create a username to comment.

This article was published and is inaccurate. NetApp low end includes FAS2220 and FAS2240. The 20x0 models are EoL. These storage systems can be all SSD if you wish and NetApp also supports automated tiering to HDD and SSD with Flash Pools. Article doesn't mme too the software differentiators too like unified replication and vAulting under the covers. Storage efficiency differentiation not covered either.
After reading the recent article entitled “Unified Storage Systems showdown: NetApp FAS vs. EMC VNX”, I have a few points I would like to address:

1. You mention that there is a difference between EMC's approach and NetApp's approach. While EMC is using Auto Tearing software logic - NetApp’s strategy is to use Flash Cache: NetApp has a Flash Cache PCIe-based solid-state storage device that speeds performance on specific applications, such as data warehousing. It also supports SSDs in the array as other storage vendors do. It is not the same thing and one does not replace the other. You can also create Flash Cache with VNX using SSD disks and use them as shocks to absorb I/O spikes. I did go over NetApp documentation and should say that NetApp just doesn’t have auto-tearing feature like EMC does.
2. Both companies are bringing up little features, differences in the ideology. Here is my simple version – one was going from SAN to NAS – another one from NAS to SAN. I really like the way Tenaja Group quoted: “ It is not relevant anymore. “
3. Another point – there is so much noise about Unified platforms – file/block, it is really SAN and NAS in one box. In a lot of cases EMC is used with a combination with VMWare or something like this. Rather than paying for VNX data movers, I would just create a VM “data mover” NAS using either Linux or Windows server. It would be high available through VMWare availability mechanisms and there would be no difference between VNX data movers and that VM NAS server. I can also say that Linux or Windows NAS would be better than VNX data mover. It can implement SFTP that VNX doesn’t have out of box.
4. There is another strange advantage of NetApp – the fact that they can scale up. Just to uncover “complex” things that usually hide the notion of “complexity”. Both are just a SAN and a NAS on the top of SAN. When the author is talking about the clustering – is he talking about scaling out SAN controllers or file movers. If this is just a file movers I would say – who cares. I would use any virtualization platform to create a small VM NAS instance. If you want multiple of them – you can use multiple of them.

Michael Petrov, Digital Edge CEO
It's a shame to see data from a trusted source so behind (6 months).
Excellent Information!!! always looking for a storage device that can speed performance