Dependencies on java.desktop

[Tom Schindl]

Hi,

Anyone else has an opinion on that? Is require static the way to go?

Tom

On 21.03.18 23:23, Tom Schindl wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I always thought the JavaFX-Codebase should be able to run with just the
> java.base module but I was browsing the codebase a bit and was suprised
> (or rather shocked) that even the base-module requires java.desktop.
> 
> If I get it correct this because of the java.beans (provided by the
> adapters) stuff is found in there. Why hasn't the requires there not
> defined as:
> 
> requires static java.desktop;
> 
> Tom
>