On 1/25/17 12:20 AM, Nicolai Parlog wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Hi Jonathan,
thanks for considering this.
If nothing else, it would require all the module-specific output
directories to be created ahead of time, so that javac can
determine which ones to use
Why would that be the case? It is not necessary to create them now so
why would using asterisk change that?
OK, I missed that you were not suggesting to adopt all of the functionality
of module source path, including the ability to specify a path of output
locations, so that module classes could be written into a directory that is
more closely associated with the source code.
It has always been the case that a single compilation for
different packages from different libraries would result in the
classes being placed in a single output directory hierarchy, and
that the classes could then be selectively packaged into different
files like .jar files.
It has also always been the case that the compiler had no notion of
projects/artifacts/modules but just of plain source files. ;) That
changed, too, so why not do the same for class files?
If you're compiling modules together, why could you not do
something similar?
I have no particular use case (except writing some demos) but I would
guess that it would make it more comfortable for existing tools to
move towards multi-module compilation.
I don't see any reason why the current design would make it harder
for tools to move towards multi-module compilation.
I also like this idea for its symmetry. You can define input the
compilers input, sorted by modules, with *, so why not do the same for
its output? Conceptually that should be obvious (which does not mean
that there are not plenty if reasons against it).
There is a much stronger, more compelling relationship in play.
The current -d option is designed so that you can put the output
directory on the class path or module path as appropriate. That's
always been the case for the classpath -- even though source
may come from a variety of directory hierarchies, the compiled
classes are put into a simple directory hierarchy that can be put
on the classpath. Now, with modules, that continues to be the case:
you can put the -d output directory on the runtime module path,
either as a single "exploded module" or as a directory of "exploded
modules". That is a compelling argument in favor of the current
design of the javac output directory.
In contrast, I don't see any compelling advantage to allowing
-d "./*/target/classes"
since that would make it significantly harder to place such a
directory on the runtime module path.
-- Jon
so long ... Nicolai
On 23.01.2017 20:51, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
Nicolai,
I don't think this proposal is a good way to go. If nothing else,
it would require all the module-specific output directories to be
created ahead of time, so that javac can determine which ones to
use, which would require additional setup commands to be executed
after a "make clean" or its equivalent in other build systems.
Also, I note that the output directory is typically never the
final location for the compiled classes; it is typically just a
"staging area". It has always been the case that a single
compilation for different packages from different libraries would
result in the classes being placed in a single output directory
hierarchy, and that the classes could then be selectively packaged
into different files like .jar files. If you're compiling modules
together, why could you not do something similar?
-- Jon
On 01/21/2017 02:00 AM, Nicolai Parlog wrote:
Hi!
Another feature request from the trenches regarding multi-module
compilation. (It is possible that there was a similar thread a
couple of days/weeks (?) back but I didn't find it.)
It would be nice to have the ability to specify module specific
target folders, so they do not automatically end up in
`<whatever-was-given-to-d>/<module-name>`.
It seems obvious (which could very well make it stupid) to reuse
the asterisk here and allow something like
javac --module-path mods --module-source-path
"./*/src/main/java" -d "./*/target/classes" -module
initial.module
I have not thought through how this might or might not work with
multiple module source paths. It looks like the only tractable
approach would be to not allow more than one -d element.
so long ... Nicolai
- --
PGP Key:
http://keys.gnupg.net/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0xCA3BAD2E9CCCD509
Web:
http://codefx.org
a blog about software development
https://www.sitepoint.com/java
high-quality Java/JVM content
http://do-foss.de
Free and Open Source Software for the City of Dortmund
Twitter:
https://twitter.com/nipafx
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=H7sH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
