jdeps -check: add section on exports

[Remi Forax]

----- Mail original -----
> De: "Jonathan Gibbons" <jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com>
> À: jigsaw-dev at openjdk.java.net
> Envoyé: Mercredi 23 Mars 2016 20:58:20
> Objet: Re: jdeps -check: add section on exports
> 
> At a minimum, it would be a candidate for a -Xlint check.
> 
> -- Jon

I think it should be an error that explains that the package containing a not visible class in the signature of a publicly visible method should be either exported or publicly exported in the module info, it will greatly help people to create correct module info.

Rémi

> 
> On 03/23/2016 11:31 AM, Remi Forax wrote:
> > In my opinion, it should be a warning (or even an error) in javac,
> > you should not create a bad module in the first place.
> >
> > Rémi
> >
> > ----- Mail original -----
> >> De: "Anthony Vanelverdinghe" <anthony.vanelverdinghe at gmail.com>
> >> À: jigsaw-dev at openjdk.java.net
> >> Envoyé: Mercredi 23 Mars 2016 19:26:24
> >> Objet: jdeps -check: add section on exports
> >>
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> It would be great if jdeps -check would also have a section on exports:
> >> this section would list non-exported packages which contain types that
> >> are exposed (e.g. through method signatures) by exported packages.
> >> Ideally, those appearances should be listed under each package, i.e.:
> >>
> >> com.foo.impl
> >>       type X is exposed by member Y of exported type Z
> >>
> >> Using this, one could easily see whether the package should indeed be
> >> exported, or whether a method was mistakenly made public, or ...
> >>
> >> JDK-8147050 already mentions the similar case of checking whether or not
> >> a "requires" ought to be public.
> >>
> >> What do you think? Should I file an issue for this?
> >>
> >> Kind regards,
> >> Anthony
> >>
> 
>