RFR: 8330005: RandomGeneratorFactory.getDefault() throws exception when the runtime image only has java.base module [v7]

[David Alayachew]

On Wed, 8 May 2024 08:30:39 GMT, Raffaello Giulietti <rgiulietti at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Move all random generators mandated in package `java.util.random` and currently implemented in module `jdk.random` to module `java.base`, and remove module `jdk.random`.
>
> Raffaello Giulietti has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Removed empty line.

oh lol, makes sense then.

It's wild though -- I always thought that deleting an entire module would
count as a backwards incompatible thing.


On Wed, Jun 5, 2024 at 1:00 AM Alan Bateman ***@***.***>
wrote:

> Hey, I'm just curious -- why was the solution to remove an entire module?
> I understand the point of moving the relevant code over to java.base, but
> I don't understand why removing the random module made sense.
>
> With the implementations moved, the jdk.random module didn't contain any
> classes. A placeholder module could have been left in place for this using
> jlink that might have a script that adds this module but it didn't seem
> worth it to do this for a release or two. It was a different answer for
> jdk.cryto.ec before it was removed. That module existed since JDK 9 so
> more likely be used in jlink scripts.
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/18932#issuecomment-2148858435>, or
> unsubscribe
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJFR6SBJJMKKIZYHUOWJLSDZF2LPZAVCNFSM6AAAAABGW67KJ2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDCNBYHA2TQNBTGU>
> .
> You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID:
> ***@***.***>
>

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18932#issuecomment-2148883348