RFR JDK-8167442: Langtools ant build not working after addition of -Xlint:exports

[Jonathan Gibbons]

On 10/10/16 11:55 PM, Jan Lahoda wrote:
> On 11.10.2016 08:11, Remi Forax wrote:
>> I don't think it's a good idea to try to hide these kind of warning
>> under the carpet.
>
> Bugs have been filled to every module in OpenJDK for which this 
> warning is reported:
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167176
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167178
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167180
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167181
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167182
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167185
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167187
>
> The warnings have been disabled in the make buildsystem so that the 
> lint can be integrated (I suspect that first trying to fix each and 
> every violation and then introduce the lint could prove to be too 
> difficult).
>
>>
>> It means that the methods are public or the class is in an exported
>> package but it should not.
>
> In the specific jdk.jshell case (which we are discussing here), the 
> warning is even more strict: in jdk.jshell there are methods like:
> JDIExecutionControl.vm()com.sun.jdi.VirtualMachine
>
> com.sun.jdi.VirtualMachine is a public exported type, but in jdk.jdi 
> module which the jdk.jshell module does not "re-export" (i.e. the 
> jdk.jshell module does not requires public jdk.jdi). So every client 
> of this method needs to require jdk.jdi themselves. Whether that is a 
> problem in this specific case, I am not sure (I am personally not sure 
> if the use of the offending classes in jdk.jshell will be mainstream 
> enough to push jdk.jdi to each client of the API).

Why not use "requires public"?  What is the downside?

-- Jon

>
>>
>> Hiding this kind of info is harmful IMO.
>
> In this specific case, we are discussing disabling the lint in the 
> developer-only ant build script for langtools. The current state 
> blocks everyone using the developer-only ant build script (or forces 
> them to use private workaround), and I am not sure we should rush some 
> decision on whether jdk.jshell should requires public jdk.jdi just to 
> unblock people that are using ant.
>
> Jan
>
>>
>> Rémi
>>
>> On October 10, 2016 6:37:39 PM GMT+02:00, Jan Lahoda
>> <jan.lahoda at oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>>     Bug:
>>     https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167442
>>
>>     Proposed solution is to disable the exports lint when compiling the
>>     langtools sources (the lint is disabled for the jdk.jshell module 
>> when
>>     building using the make buildsystem).
>>
>>     Webrev:
>>     http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlahoda/8167442/webrev.00/
>>
>>     Any feedback is welcome.
>>
>>     Thanks,
>>           Jan
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.