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 <matt...@farwell.co.uk>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 <reini...@gmail.com> > >> 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 javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com. >> 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 javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com. > 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 javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
