Are modifiers `static` and `transitive` incompatible?

[Alan Bateman]

On 31/01/2024 07:47, Piotr P. Karwasz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The `requires` instruction can have two qualifiers `static` and
> `transitive` that separately make perfect sense. For a module `foo`:
>
>   * `requires static bar;`, makes resolution of the `bar` module
> optional at runtime,
>   * `requires transitive bar;`, allows each module that reads `foo` to
> also read `bar`. As far as I understand this means that `bar` must be
> present at both compile time and runtime.
>
> There is however a third option allowed:
>
> ```java
> module foo {
>      requires static transitive bar;
> }
> ```
It may be surprising but they do work together. If bar is resolved then 
foo will read bar. If there is another module baz that requires foo (and 
doesn't explicitly require bar) then baz will read foo, and if bar is 
resolved, then baz will read bar.


> :
> We often end up with such directives, when using the
> `bnd-maven-plugin`, which maps the OSGi `resolution:=optional`
> directive to `static` and the `uses:=...` directive to `transitive`.
> If we mark a package as optional, but the package uses public types
> from `bar`, we end up with `static transitive`.
>
> Is this a bug of the plugin or does `static transitive` have a meaning?
>
I think it's more of a case that it is fragile for modules like foo to 
have bar types foo API signatures.  `requires static` is okay for things 
like annotations with a retention policy of "source" but going beyond 
that means giving up a bit on reliable configuration. In the example, 
foo probably has a reflection guard and is careful in their use of bar 
types. However, foo's user if baz and the maintainers of baz are unaware 
of these shenanigans. This creates a risk that baz code will get a CNFE 
at runtime.

-Alan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jigsaw-dev/attachments/20240131/16653554/attachment.htm>