> On May 2, 2017, at 2:22 PM, Kevin Rushforth <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Here is the message:
>
> IllegalAccessException: class com.sun.javafx.property.MethodHelper cannot
> access class com.foo (in module foo.app) because module foo.app does not open
> com.foo to javafx.base
>
It would be better to emit a more informative message e.g. “javafx.base cannot
access class com.foo (in module foo.app). Either exports com.foo unqualifiedly
or open com.foo to javafx.base”. Also in MethodUtil::invoke
61 if (!module.isExported(packageName)) {
You can do this check only if module.isNamed.
> It is roughly the same message that any similar illegal access would generate
> (e.g., we get similar error messages when FXML tries to call setAccessible
> for a field annotated with @FXML if the module is not "open" to javafx.fxml).
>
>> javafx.base/src/main/java/com/sun/javafx/property/MethodHelper.java
>> javafx.fxml/src/main/java/com/sun/javafx/fxml/MethodHelper.java
>> javafx.web/src/main/java/com/sun/webkit/MethodHelper.java
>> 45 public static Object invoke(Method m, Object obj, Object[] params)
>>
>> To avoid 3 ModuleHelper classes, the invoke method can take
>> the callerModule argument to replace this line:
>> 56 final Module thisModule = MethodHelper.class.getModule();
>>
>
> I'm fairly certain that won't work. Module::addOpens is caller sensitive and
> will only work when called from the module in question.
>
You are right. Wont’t work.
>> javafx.base/src/main/java/com/sun/javafx/reflect/MethodUtil.java
>> There are a few other public methods which I think JavaFX doesn’t
>> need and can be removed.
>>
>
> Yes, I could do this to reduce the public footprint of the class. To minimize
> the diffs between the original and our copy, I might just comment out the
> "public". That would also make it easier to add them back in a future version
> (e.g., to eventually get rid of all dependency on sun.reflect.misc). Thoughts?
I will leave it up to you.
Mandy
