Having a module name which is a legal identifier will make the javac parser and the JLS a little easier to write.
About having a way to reference a module directly in the source code, my fear is that we will run into the same issue as Package.getPackage(name) [1] cheers, Rémi [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mr/jigsaw/spec/api/java/lang/Package.html#getPackage-java.lang.String- ----- Mail original ----- > De: "Paul Benedict" <[email protected]> > À: "Remi Forax" <[email protected]> > Cc: "Mario Torre" <[email protected]>, > [email protected] > Envoyé: Mercredi 28 Octobre 2015 16:19:44 > Objet: Re: Jigsaw @ JavaOne 2015 > Yes, and if module identifiers can be specified in the source code natively > (i.e., literals without strings), then they will fit into the current syntax > for Java identifiers [1]. > [1] https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19798-01/821-1841/bnbuk/index.html > Cheers, > Paul > On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 6:56 AM, Remi Forax < [email protected] > wrote: > > Hi Marrio, > > > When creating a new application, using the prefix of the packages as name > > for > > a module seems intuitive and using '_' instead of '.' as separator inside > > the module name avoid the unecessary confusion for a human between a > > package > > and a module with the same name, it's just a code convention. > > > When retrofitting an old application, like by example the JDK, you will > > group > > packages that have no a common prefix name or the common prefix can be used > > for several modules, in that case, having a module named java.base but no > > package java.base.something seems counter intuitive, using '_' instead of > > '.' make clear that a module name is just a name. > > > regards, > > > Rémi > > > ----- Mail original ----- > > > > De: "Mario Torre" < [email protected] > > > > > À: "Paul Benedict" < [email protected] > > > > > Cc: [email protected] > > > > Envoyé: Mardi 27 Octobre 2015 23:41:05 > > > > Objet: Re: Jigsaw @ JavaOne 2015 > > > > > > > > 2015-10-27 22:13 GMT+01:00 Paul Benedict < [email protected] >: > > > > > Thanks Mark. Great slides. I'd just like to throw out my impression > > > > (again) > > > > > that module names with dots look like packages. How receptive is the EG > > > > to > > > > > changing it to underscores? > > > > > > > > I think that this is the exact point, mapping to package seems quite > > > > intuitive as it represents directly the content of the module. > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Mario > > > > > > > > -- > > > > pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF > > > > Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF > > > > > > > > Java Champion - Blog: http://neugens.wordpress.com - Twitter: @neugens > > > > Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/ > > > > OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/ > > > > > > > > Please, support open standards: > > > > http://endsoftpatents.org/ > > > > >
