General question: sun package -> jdk package?

Joel Borggrén-Franck joel.borggren.franck at gmail.com
Sun Dec 20 19:46:46 UTC 2015


Do you know if it is only newConstructorForSerialization? Is it worth
keeping a minimal ReflectionFactory in sun.reflect that only exposes
that?

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Chris Hegarty <chris.hegarty at oracle.com> wrote:
> On 15/12/15 18:56, Joel Borggrén-Franck wrote:
>>
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>> I'm somewhat surprised to see ReflectionFactory on that list. Can you
>> share more details around its external use?
>
>
> ReflectionFactory.newConstructorForSerialization is used by several
> popular third party serialization, mocking, proxying, libraries to
> construct objects in a non-standard way.
>
> -Chris.
>
>> cheers
>> /Joel
>>
>> On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 at 16:15 Chris Hegarty <chris.hegarty at oracle.com
>> <mailto:chris.hegarty at oracle.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     Paul,
>>
>>     I cannot address your general question, but I guess it might be
>>     motivated
>>     by some of my recent preparatory work for JEP 260 [1]. This JEP
>> proposes
>>     to expose a small number of critical API’s that are in the sun.misc
>> and
>>     sun.reflect namespace. Anything not deemed critical should be removed
>>     from these packages, since it should not be exposed.  There is also a
>>     significant amount of technical debt in these packages.
>>
>>     -Chris.
>>
>>     [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8132928
>>
>>     On 15 Dec 2015, at 15:09, Paul Benedict <pbenedict at apache.org
>>     <mailto:pbenedict at apache.org>> wrote:
>>
>>      > I have a general question prompted by the many classes moved from
>>     sun.* to
>>      > jdk.*. Once JDK 9 delivers on the Module System and internals are
>>     no longer
>>      > exposed, is it planned to eventually migrate away from the sun.*
>>     legacy
>>      > namespace in later JDK versions?
>>      >
>>      > Cheers,
>>      > Paul
>>
>



More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list