Steps towards integrating Kulla into JDK9

[Maurizio Cimadamore]

We seem to be split about this - I agree with Robert; there are tools 
under unevocative module names i.e. most of the langtools tools are 
under jdk.compiler, jdeps is in jdk.dev; other tools such as jconsole 
and pack200 got their own module. So I guess it can go both ways, and I 
agree that repl/eval etc. is somehow not very informative.

Maurizio

On 23/04/15 21:59, mark.reinhold at oracle.com wrote:
> 2015/4/23 1:51 -0700, brian.goetz at oracle.com:
>> I guess we've got us a bikeshed :)
>>
>>> As to the name of the package, that depends where the center is.  For
>>> someone wanting to look at how the tool is implemented jdk.jshell would
>>> be right. For an IDE using the evaluation API, jdk.eval or something
>>> like that would be appropriate. I think eval applies to both, but jshell
>>> only applies to the tool.
>> While this argument would surely hold up in court, I think the notion of
>> "tool backed by a library" is one that is entirely understandable to
>> people, and "jdk.jshell" is much more evocative of what it does than
>> "jdk.eval".  I worry that we're sacrificing usability for correctness in
>> this choice of name.  We want people to be able to look at the module
>> names in the module graph and be able to have an idea of what it does.
> I agree.  "jdk.jshell" is a better name for the module, and for the
> packages that it exports.  "eval" is just way too generic, and "repl"
> is a somewhat specialized term (not to us, but to the 9 million).
>
> - Mark