isn't OSGi doing that already ? (not that I want to spark again the debate
OSGi vs Jigsaw).


On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Matthew Farwell <[email protected]>wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Could someone point me towards a language which (in their view) got
> modularization correct? So this would probably be including the declaration
> in the source, along with version, right up to runtime protection of the
> running classes, so I could run multiple versions of the same module in the
> same runtime.
>
> Could anyone point me to any references?
>
> Thanks
>
> Matthew Farwell.
>
>
> 2013/9/10 Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]>
>
>> This is kind of a shame. My biggest disappointment in scala, phantom,
>> kotlin, and all the other 'new' languages I ever looked at, is a complete
>> lack of acknowledgement that, this day and age, I expect a language to take
>> the concept of modules and internet-based dependency resolution as a
>> first-class language feature. Basically, import statements should have URLs
>> or some such. The compiler should take in an entire project and spit out a
>> jar, and that's the only way the compiler should work. At least, a compiler
>> of a 'next gen' language.
>>
>> jigsaw kind of, sort of, somewhere felt like it might at least make javac
>> operate in such an alternate mode more or less, but this simplification is
>> moving away from that ideal.
>>
>> That's not to say this is necessarily a bad idea; a pipe dream isn't
>> always doable. Still, jigsaw's lack of progress saddens me a bit.
>>
>> On Thursday, August 29, 2013 8:24:46 PM UTC+2, Jan Goyvaerts wrote:
>>>
>>> *sigh*
>>>
>>> Was (being inspired by) OSGi really *such* a bad idea ? :-/
>>>
>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/**pipermail/jigsaw-dev/2013-**
>>> August/003328.html<http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jigsaw-dev/2013-August/003328.html>
>>>
>>> They didn't postpone the schedule a fourth time, did they ?
>>>
>>  --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Java Posse" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to [email protected].
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Java Posse" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java 
Posse" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to