Like with package names, module names must be globally unique to prevent
name clashes. What that means is module names must be hierarchically
structured so that different parts of a name can be assigned by
different parties (for example: prefix is taken from domain name, ...).
I haven't seen a syntax using underscores for expressing hierarchy in
names yet. Using underscores as hierarchy delimiters would also be
inconsistent with other Java names, because components of module name
could not use Java identifier syntax then which includes underscores. I
think it is important to make a distinction between a convention and a
prescribed syntax of a hierarchical name.
Regards, Peter
On 10/29/2015 12:03 AM, Paul Benedict wrote:
Tim, but Maven doesn't have a native concept of packages. That's a compiler
concern, and now Java's compiler will have both package names and module
names both with dots? I think that is confusing. A package is a properly
nested naming structure... but a module is just a simple name. Correct me
if wrong, but modules can't bundle nested modules, right? If it can't, then
using dots is more problematic than it's worth. That's why I recommend it
follow the standard Java identifier rules where underscores are the
preferred separator.
On Oct 28, 2015 2:43 PM, "Tim Boudreau" <[email protected]> wrote:
+1 - people have been using . as a delimiter for maven groupId and
artifactId names for years, and I've never heard of someone's head
exploding as a result.
Similarly, NetBeans module system has used . as a delimiter since 2000, and
I don't recall ever seeing a message on the mailing lists (which I've been
on since '99 and am still active on) having a problem with it.
-Tim
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 12:59 PM, David M. Lloyd <[email protected]>
wrote:
We've been (with JBoss Modules and thus our various application server
offerings) using module name conventions that match package names for
several years, and the number of people who have actually been confused
by
it to my knowledge is exactly zero.
The actual problem is probably quite overstated. People just don't seem
to have trouble with this (nor do people generally seem to get confused
by,
for example, a C++ library name being the same as the root C++ namespace
used by that library, to draw another language equivalent).
On 10/28/2015 06:56 AM, Remi Forax 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/
--
- DML
--
http://timboudreau.com
