Alan,

It seems you have completely misunderstood my message. It’s not about any 
specific JDK bug. I have already sent mail to the AWT mailing list about the 
bug.

My message is about how jigsaw supports or prevents workarounds that require 
access to “private” JDK APIs.

I’ll repeat the questions here, for convenience:

>> Is it the position of the jigsaw team that I should not do this? [the 
>> workaround]
>> 
>> Is it the position of the jigsaw team that it is acceptable for someone in 
>> my position to somehow inform and convince every application developer who 
>> knowingly or unknowingly uses a library to change the command line arguments 
>> in their build configuration so that this workaround will run? (And later, 
>> presumably, get them all to remove the command line argument when the 
>> workaround is no longer needed?)


  Alan





> On Dec 1, 2015, at 12:26 PM, Alan Bateman <alan.bate...@oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> On 01/12/2015 18:26, Alan Snyder wrote:
>> The following is a workaround that I recently added to my code:
>> 
>> OGLRenderQueue rq = OGLRenderQueue.getInstance();
>> rq.lock();
>> 
>> try {
>>     // my code here
>> } finally {
>>     rq.unlock();
>> }
>> It is a workaround for a lack of synchronization in the AWT, a bug that was 
>> reported 18 months ago.
>> 
>> Is it the position of the jigsaw team that I should not do this?
>> 
>> Is it the position of the jigsaw team that it is acceptable for someone in 
>> my position to somehow inform and convince every application developer who 
>> knowingly or unknowingly uses a library to change the command line arguments 
>> in their build configuration so that this workaround will run? (And later, 
>> presumably, get them all to remove the command line argument when the 
>> workaround is no longer needed?)
>> 
>> I would appreciate learning where people stand on this issue.
> All I can suggest is start a discussion on the 2d-dev mailing list on this 
> topic. Small test cases that reproduce an issue easily are always welcome. If 
> you know this area then maybe you have a candidate patch to get the 
> discussion going.
> 
> -Alan.

Reply via email to