java

[swarfega]

Do you need the jre in both 32-bit and 64-bit installed on your system or can you go wholey 64-bit for use with whichever browser you use (including 64-bit ones)?

 

[Captain Zero]

Only if you use a x32 browser do you need both. Otherwise, use the x64 one.

 

[jfar]

I have both installed, so I dont seem to be asked anymore to install it for whatever reason.

 

[swarfega]

Ill have to keep both until flash is released in 64-bit.

 

[Captain Zero]

Exactly. We're all in the same boat.

 

[Win7User512]

I have both installed, so I dont seem to be asked anymore to install it for whatever reason.

That's what I do too; for frustration's sake.

 

[johngalt]

I do both too - but I have noticed more than once that if I code an app using an IDE that is pointing to the 64bit version of JAVA and then take it to a machine with the same IDE but pointing to a 32bit version, it has gone screwy on me a couple of times - I cannot understand how as I thought the APIs were identical.....

But I still keep both.

 

[Win7User512]

I do both too - but I have noticed more than once that if I code an app using an IDE that is pointing to the 64bit version of JAVA and then take it to a machine with the same IDE but pointing to a 32bit version, it has gone screwy on me a couple of times - I cannot understand how as I thought the APIs were identical.....

But I still keep both.

Wouldn't the API's source for x86 and x64 be different?

 

[johngalt]

I wouldn't think so, other than location, if my supposition that the APIs themselves are the same....

But I may be wrong....

 

[darkassain]

I do both too - but I have noticed more than once that if I code an app using an IDE that is pointing to the 64bit version of JAVA and then take it to a machine with the same IDE but pointing to a 32bit version, it has gone screwy on me a couple of times - I cannot understand how as I thought the APIs were identical.....

But I still keep both.

yep im the same boat as you are....
the only thing i can think of is that something is different when compiling to byte code changes enough to affect whether it was compiled in 32 or 64...:sarc:
had to compile 32 bit as the class computers are using 32bit xp...[shudder]...:shock:

 

[kpo6969]

https://jdk6.dev.java.net/6uNea.html

 

[Win7User512]

I wouldn't think so, other than location, if my supposition that the APIs themselves are the same....

But I may be wrong....

I would think that while the objects and methods, etc would be the same names, the implementation of them at the source code level would be different for the different architectures (utilizing different sized address spaces).

 

[johngalt]

I'll have to check on that - superficially it makes sense, but there is something nagging at me from JAVA class that wants me to jump up and contradict that...but I cannot remember what....

 

[darkassain]

I would think that while the objects and methods, etc would be the same names, the implementation of them at the source code level would be different for the different architectures (utilizing different sized address spaces).

but you see that's why there is a interminably language called byte-code which in theory should solve the problem of different architectures (and that the x86-64 is a superset and in essence should be in theory backwards compatible...)

my belief is that this might be a bug as byte-code should eliminate the problem of different architectures (since the JRE is actually doing the actual compiling to machine code and to the correct microcode...:huh

 

[Win7User512]

I'll have to check on that - superficially it makes sense, but there is something nagging at me from JAVA class that wants me to jump up and contradict that...but I cannot remember what....

but you see that's why there is a interminably language called byte-code which in theory should solve the problem of different architectures (and that the x86-64 is a superset and in essence should be in theory backwards compatible...)

my belief is that this might be a bug as byte-code should eliminate the problem of different architectures (since the JRE is actually doing the actual compiling to machine code and to the correct microcode...:huh

I thought about this issue some more after posting (and tried to find some research on it). The source code may be the same (though I would expect it do be tailored to x64) however, the compiler (and Java VM) would have to be different, especially if the source is the same. SOMETHING has to be different in order to utilize 64 bit addressing.

 

[johngalt]

True - but when using an IDE, (or, more specifically, when using JCreator), it compiles the app prior to running it even if the .class files already exist - that is what I was trying to remember yesterday that made me want to argue against the source differentiation yesterday....

 

[Win7User512]

True - but when using an IDE, (or, more specifically, when using JCreator), it compiles the app prior to running it even if the .class files already exist - that is what I was trying to remember yesterday that made me want to argue against the source differentiation yesterday....

And what compiles the app? The Java compiler (either x86 or x64).

 

[DOC8]

play right

Some of you go on about java. Why do you treat your new sister like your old brother. If you want to play with her forget about him for now. He's playing with another girl any way.I installed Microsoft Silverlight and haven't had any problems. I have 64 bit so I installed java 32 and 64 bit just because my older brother had it. But my new sister didn't like it and didn't want to play with me. So I did some research and found that she likes the Silverlight. If you like, go here: Essentials - Windows Live its free.good luck. Best regards DOC