| Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Announcing JDK 9 support for Eclipse Neon |
|
Hi Wayne, I just spoke directly with Mark Reinhold. It is absolutely an expected use case that users/organizations will build jimages that include their own code, third-party modules, and JDK modules. There is a lot of perceived value in being able to ship a single image file rather than a bunch of JARs, modularized JARs, or JMOD files. As Tom said earlier in this thread, loose JAR files will manifest in a single "unnamed" module that automatically has access to everything in the image. This will mean that--blocked access to internal APIs notwithstanding--everything will basically work as it does today. But, the expectation is that libraries will start shipping as modules. There's been a lot of talk this week about migration strategies by moving JARs out of the unnamed module into "automatic" modules and then proper modules. I believe that Java developers will expect to be able to get help building/verifying the module-info.jar file, define and export modules, and include both jimage and jmod files in their build path. Note that the compiler will be expected to respect visibility restrictions. I think that being able to output a jimage is a nice-to-have at this point. Wayne On 28/10/15 12:47 PM, Stephan Herrmann wrote:
I don't see a conflict between Jay's and your observations: Yes, users will be able to create / compile / package modules. No, users will not create Jimage files. Whether or not it is a module is a conceptual question. It needs a module-info.java / module-info.class and there you are. The Jimage format, by contrast is a purely technical question of how bits and pieces are encoded / packaged. JDK uses Jimage to ship their libraries, user modules are shipped as jars. So when you convert a "legacy" user library into a module, technically that would be a jar -> jar transformation. Makes sense? Stephan ----- ursprüngliche Nachricht --------- Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Announcing JDK 9 support for Eclipse Neon Date: Mi 28 Okt 2015 04:30:11 CET From: Tom Schindl<tom.schindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx >From the j1 session(s) - I attended I can not share this! They've been talking about making modules out of libraries jars. Jars on the classpath get automatically wrapped into 1 virtual module at runtime. My understanding was that all you need to to do is to call a command line app to make a module from a jar (which although autogenerates the module-info.java). There are chances although that I completely screwed this up. There's been a ton of informations on all this stuff and without at least having had a hands on it's really easy to mix things up. Tom On 27.10.15 19:35, Jayaprakash Arthanareeswaran wrote:
created specifically for the JDK/JRE and the IDE is only expected to read these. User defined modules will either be in source form or JAR form. One of the goals of the JEP 220 is this: "Restructure the JDK and JRE run-time images to draw a clear distinction between files that developers, deployers, and end-users can rely upon and, when appropriate, modify, in contrast to files that are internal to the implementation and subject to change without notice. " The way I see it, a Jimage is purely meant to be part of a JDK and nowhere else. Regards, Jay Inactive hide details for Mike Milinkovich ---10/28/2015 02:49:43 AM---On 27/10/2015 5:18 PM, Daniel Megert wrote: > > "InsteadMike Milinkovich ---10/28/2015 02:49:43 AM---On 27/10/2015 5:18 PM, Daniel Megert wrote: > > "Instead, API is provided for reading the content of From: Mike Milinkovich <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx> To: Daniel Megert <daniel_megert@xxxxxxxxxx>, Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: 10/28/2015 02:49 AM Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Announcing JDK 9 support for Eclipse Neon Sent by: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 27/10/2015 5:18 PM, Daniel Megert wrote: > "Instead, API is provided for reading the content of such image." ==> The format is not specified but APIs allow to read the content. Maybe I am wrong, but since we are a Java IDE don't we also have to *write* the content of such files? -- Mike Milinkovich_ __mike.milinkovich@eclipse.org_ <mailto:mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx> +1.613.220.3223 (mobile) _ _EclipseCon Europe 2015 <http://www.eclipsecon.org/europe2015>_______________________________________________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev _______________________________________________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev -- Wayne Beaton @waynebeaton The Eclipse Foundation cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev |
