Question on Implied readability

[Ali Ebrahimi]

Hi,


On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 1:21 AM, Alan Bateman <Alan.Bateman at oracle.com>
wrote:

> On 02/11/2015 20:02, Ali Ebrahimi wrote:
> Thanks, I see the issue. The reason it didn't duplicate for me is because
> I hadn't dropped the requires com.bar.
>
> So the bug is implied readability across layers when the same named module
> exists in multiple layers. In this case com.foo should read com.bar at 1.
> The com.bar (@2) is the same configuration as com.foo is confusing the
> code. We'll need to fix this.
>
> So, you say com.foo can not read com.bar(@2) and why?
Based on implied readability module com.foo implicitly reads com.bar, in
other word have requires com.bar;
and because com.bar(@2) is co-layer with com.foo, so
module com.foo should reads com.bar(@2).
com.bar(@2) override com.bar(@1) for com.foo.
How this specified in spec?

> -Alan
>

-- 

Best Regards,
Ali Ebrahimi