On Fri, 21 Aug 2026 17:16:38 GMT, Chen Liang <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > Would it not be better to move the implementation classes to >>> > `jdk.internal` just like the Vector API does? >>> >>> @minborg `java.base` cannot depend on an incubating module. >> >> `jdk.internal` is not actually a restricted package namespace like `java.*` >> is. > > @ExE-Boss `jdk.internal` can be exported to `jdk.incubator.json`, but classes > in `jdk.internal` cannot implement API interfaces declared in > `jdk.incubator.json`. @liach > @ExE-Boss `jdk.internal` can be exported to `jdk.incubator.json`, but classes > in `jdk.internal` cannot implement API interfaces declared in > `jdk.incubator.json`. I mean that a `jdk.internal.json` package can be defined by a non‑bootstrap/platform classloader, so the `jdk.incubator.json` module could use it instead of using `jdk.incubator.json.impl`. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/32282#issuecomment-5375686734
