Implied readability + layers
ali.ebrahimi1781 at gmail.com
Fri Nov 6 20:37:22 UTC 2015
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 11:42 PM, Alan Bateman <Alan.Bateman at oracle.com>
> On 06/11/2015 19:18, Ali Ebrahimi wrote:
> Right, I think you are running into issue again where the two versions of
> com.bar have equal ModuleDescriptors. When you create modular JAR then I'm
> guessing you add a module version and this makes them non-equal.
> For the exploded module case then you could changing one of them to
> "export com.bar.extra" to make them non-equal. This is just temporary until
> we get the API changed as I mentioned in some of the other mails.
Is not better we allow compiler support for module version in module
>> Also, if you remove com.bar from root module list for cfg2 final result
>> will change:
>> Configuration cfg2 = Configuration
>> .resolve(finder2, layer1,ModuleFinder.empty(),"com.foo")
>> So all of this can not cause hard to find bugs in user applications.
>> Yes, nobody requires com.bar in the configuration for layer2 and so
> com.bar at 2 is ignored.
But don't you think with special handing of implied readability all of this
occurs and maybe some non-discovered ones.
May be user or IDE think adding 'requires com.bar' to com.foo is redundant
More information about the jigsaw-dev