#LayerPrimitives aka allowing to add private package at runtime to a module ?

Jochen Theodorou blackdrag at gmx.org
Thu Mar 16 21:42:54 UTC 2017

sure, I will do that in the future if that is then the way to go. 
Because before (maybe a year ago) I was told to post to the dev list 

On 16.03.2017 18:19, Andrew Dinn wrote:
> Hi Jochen,
> If you want to comment on a thread on the expert group list then you
> really need to post that comment to the observers or comments list.
> Posting it here without any context is just going to confuse people who
> don't read the expert group list
> n.b. I am replying to the jigsaw-dev list rather than just to you
> directly so as to clarify the provenance of your post for those who are
> still as confused as I was until I found David's original note on the
> expert group list.
> regards,
> Andrew Dinn
> -----------
> Senior Principal Software Engineer
> Red Hat UK Ltd
> Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903
> Directors: Michael Cunningham, Michael ("Mike") O'Neill, Eric Shander
> On 16/03/17 14:53, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
>> On 16.03.2017 14:39, David M. Lloyd wrote:
>> [...]
>>> It's clear that modules are not to be treated like classes, because (for
>>> example) circularity among modules is considered "bad" whereas
>>> circularity among classes has been shown to be indispensable, and
>>> classes within a class loader or module are loaded and resolved lazily
>>> whereas modules are loaded and resolved aggressively, etc.  But I see
>>> your point that only "special" citizens ought to mutate a module.  I
>>> agree, but I do not think this should be limited to agents: containers
>>> also have a similar need for similar reasons.
>> and I would not simply limit this to containers as well. If you have a
>> programming language runtime for example you have an element, that will
>> have to do similar tasks to what Java internals will want to do.. for
>> example proxies. But the big difference is, that we are not containing
>> the classes we do the work for. The modules containing those might even
>> be loaded already and instances of those classes may already exist.
>> I was told an agent can mutate the module information. And I don't
>> understand if an agent can do it, why a normal method cannot... or what
>> makes a citizen "special" enough to be able to do it. On the contrary
>> this discussion now gives me the impression an agent cannot mutate the
>> module after it came into existence without duplicating classes. Clearly
>> I had yet no time to actually try this :(
>> bye Jochen

More information about the jigsaw-dev mailing list