Progress report on SLF4J project modularization

[forax at univ-mlv.fr]

----- Mail original -----
> De: "Robert Scholte" <rfscholte at apache.org>
> À: "Remi Forax" <forax at univ-mlv.fr>
> Cc: jigsaw-dev at openjdk.java.net
> Envoyé: Dimanche 26 Mars 2017 11:46:40
> Objet: Re: Progress report on SLF4J project modularization

> Hi Rémi,

caveat: i'm not fully competent here,

> 
> IIUC the only way to confirm that all requirements are added to the module
> descriptor is to compile the module-info file together with its sources. A
> correct and complete module-info is the base of the modular system.
> That's the reason why I chose for the first option.

I believe that if you are compiling the module-info.java with the already compiled classes, it should work (apart if you compile with --module-source-path)
I fail to see what check the compiler will not done in that case.

> 
> thanks,
> Robert

Rémi

> 
> On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 21:32:18 +0100, Remi Forax <forax at univ-mlv.fr> wrote:
> 
>> Robert,
>> they are two ways to compile a project with a version which is not java
>> 9, let say 8 and a module-info with java 9.
>>
>> Either, like the Maven compiler plugin, you compile twice the source,
>> once with java 9 and once with java 8 excluding the module-info.java,
>> or you compile once with java 8 excluding the module-info and you then
>> compile only the module-info.java with java 9 (it's what Ceki has used).
>>
>> The later solution is usually faster and avoid subtle bugs like if
>> between java x and java 9, the code of javac changes the way a synthetic
>> class is named (you will have the two versions with the compiler plugin).
>>
>> cheers,
>> Rémi
>> ----- Mail original -----
>>> De: "Robert Scholte" <rfscholte at apache.org>
>>> À: jigsaw-dev at openjdk.java.net
>>> Envoyé: Samedi 25 Mars 2017 18:56:50
>>> Objet: Re: Progress report on SLF4J project modularization
>>
>>> On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 15:38:27 +0100, Ceki Gulcu <ceki at qos.ch> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Following the recipe at [2], it all seems to work.
>>>
>>> Good to read that the recipe works. If we need to add things to this
>>> recipe to improve it, just let me know.
>>> Although in general I don't think we'll be helping developers if we show
>>> the javac with its commandline arguments, especially since most of it is
>>> hidden or calculated inside the maven-compiler-plugin.
>>>
>>> thanks,
> >> Robert