Specifying module paths

[Paul Benedict]

Alan, thanks for responding. When I read the JDK ticket, I was drawn to the
quote regarding "getting away from large command lines" (paraphrasing). If
that's an important goal and a future best-practice, then I think wherever
patch/override classes can be enumerated on the command line, .properties
should be supported too.

Cheers,
Paul

On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 3:26 AM, Alan Bateman <Alan.Bateman at oracle.com>
wrote:

> On 09/01/2016 22:12, Paul Benedict wrote:
>
>> What will the interaction be between a .properties and patching? It would
>> make sense, I think, to allow a project to specify all the modules for
>> compiling source, but then allow overrides for compiling/executing tests.
>> If overrides aren't available, then overrides will have to be calculated
>> manually to generate another .properties file. This isn't a complaint;
>> it's
>> just speaking the conclusion aloud for input.
>>
> I would assume javac -Xmodule and the -Xpatch support shouldn't be
> impacted by this. The proposal just allows a properties file to be
> specified as an alternative to a directory (java -mp
> dir1:mymods.properties:dir2 ..) and so the patching/overriding should
> continue to work. Or maybe you mean that -Xpatch should allow properties to
> be specified in its value too?
>
> -Alan.
>