Re: JAR searched on the classpath instead of the module path in Build #156

Hi Alan, I'm upgrading my "Migrating to Java 9 Modules" talk to the latest build and run into the same problem with build 9-ea+160-jigsaw-nightly-h6207-20170316. Hibernate-core is an automatic-module. This JAR contains the xsd file that can't be loaded. The Hibernate code does the following: pub

Re: #LayerPrimitives

On 17/03/2017 16:12, Stephen Colebourne wrote: I note that Proxy appears to have a special case for "dynamic modules", and am concerned that this may over-emphasise Proxy compared to other similar tools that are not part of the JDK. Some of the recent mails that mention Proxy are misleading. I

Re: #LayerPrimitives

On 03/17/2017 11:12 AM, Stephen Colebourne wrote: I note the discussions on various threads about JPMS primitives. My first expectation is that OSGI and JBoss modules can run in Java 9 in classpath mode. I believe this to be true today. Of course. My second expectation is that there are suf

#LayerPrimitives

I note the discussions on various threads about JPMS primitives. My first expectation is that OSGI and JBoss modules can run in Java 9 in classpath mode. I believe this to be true today. My second expectation is that there are sufficient primitive operations within JPMS to allow a _new_ module

hg: jigsaw/jake/jdk: Clean up proxy implementation that the package should exist in a module

Changeset: 5ec76186fe3d Author:mchung Date: 2017-03-17 09:03 -0700 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jigsaw/jake/jdk/rev/5ec76186fe3d Clean up proxy implementation that the package should exist in a module ! src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/reflect/Module.java ! src/java.base/sh

Re: When will Jigsaw be fully merged with the early access JDK 9?

On 17/03/2017 14:02, Paul Deitel wrote: Thanks Alan! So at this point, should I just move to testing with JDK 9 and ignore the separate jigsaw build? If you are looking for more stability then the JDK 9 downloads are best. The Jigsaw EA builds are there for those on the bleeding edge that wa

Re: #LayerPrimitives aka allowing to add private package at runtime to a module ?

On 17.03.2017 10:26, Andrew Dinn wrote: The major problem is that of quoting and responding *here* to a fragment of a thread posted *there* (on the EG list). If you want to take part in a dialogue then directing your comments to another room, albeit an adjacent one, generally falls somewhere betw

Re: Alternatives to automatic modules as a concept

On 17/03/2017 14:16, David M. Lloyd wrote: Hmm, so automatic modules explicitly are going to allow cycles then? How is that going to not hinder migration, if cycles are disallowed once the thing is properly modularized? Automatic modules are for libraries that have not been migrated. The m

Re: Alternatives to automatic modules as a concept

On 03/17/2017 09:08 AM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 17/03/2017 13:36, David M. Lloyd wrote: SLF4J APIs and implementations are cyclic. You have to manually bundle them into a single JAR before they could work with automodules. BTW: Which of the providers are you using to see the problem? I'm wond

Re: Alternatives to automatic modules as a concept

On 17/03/2017 13:36, David M. Lloyd wrote: SLF4J APIs and implementations are cyclic. You have to manually bundle them into a single JAR before they could work with automodules. BTW: Which of the providers are you using to see the problem? I'm wondering if you might have converted them to ex

Re: Alternatives to automatic modules as a concept

On 03/17/2017 08:40 AM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 17/03/2017 13:36, David M. Lloyd wrote: SLF4J APIs and implementations are cyclic. You have to manually bundle them into a single JAR before they could work with automodules. They can combined via command line options but would be interesting to

Re: When will Jigsaw be fully merged with the early access JDK 9?

Thanks Alan! So at this point, should I just move to testing with JDK 9 and ignore the separate jigsaw build? On Mar 17, 2017, at 9:52 AM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 17/03/2017 13:44, Paul Deitel wrote: > I am currently testing with JDK 9 from both > > https://jdk9.java.net/download/

Re: When will Jigsaw be fully merged with the early access JDK 9?

On 17/03/2017 13:44, Paul Deitel wrote: I am currently testing with JDK 9 from both https://jdk9.java.net/download/ and https://jdk9.java.net/jigsaw/ When will these be merged into a single download (or have th

When will Jigsaw be fully merged with the early access JDK 9?

I am currently testing with JDK 9 from both https://jdk9.java.net/download/ and https://jdk9.java.net/jigsaw/ When will these be merged into a single download (or have they been already)? Thanks, Paul

Re: Alternatives to automatic modules as a concept

On 17/03/2017 13:36, David M. Lloyd wrote: SLF4J APIs and implementations are cyclic. You have to manually bundle them into a single JAR before they could work with automodules. They can combined via command line options but would be interesting to see if you can put the API JAR on the modul

Re: Alternatives to automatic modules as a concept

On 03/17/2017 08:34 AM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 17/03/2017 13:30, David M. Lloyd wrote: And some auxiliary food for thought: today, it will fail on any JAR set that includes SLF4J. Sorry SLF4J fans! Can you be more specific? SLF4J APIs and implementations are cyclic. You have to manually

hg: jigsaw/jake/jdk: 68 new changesets

Changeset: 4b8e662483a1 Author:dl Date: 2017-03-07 10:06 -0800 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jigsaw/jake/jdk/rev/4b8e662483a1 8176155: SubmissionPublisher closeExceptionally() may override close() Reviewed-by: martin, psandoz ! src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/concurrent/Sub

hg: jigsaw/jake/hotspot: 18 new changesets

Changeset: 1c29d5e01ace Author:rbackman Date: 2017-02-23 10:08 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jigsaw/jake/hotspot/rev/1c29d5e01ace 8175336: [TESTBUG] aot junit tests added by 8169588 are not executed. Reviewed-by: kvn ! test/compiler/aot/jdk.tools.jaotc.test/src/jdk/tools/j

hg: jigsaw/jake/langtools: 21 new changesets

Changeset: 17249d1d92fe Author:darcy Date: 2017-03-07 08:43 -0800 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jigsaw/jake/langtools/rev/17249d1d92fe 8176266: Make visitUnknown specification more explicit Reviewed-by: jlahoda ! src/java.compiler/share/classes/javax/lang/model/element/ModuleElem

hg: jigsaw/jake/nashorn: 3 new changesets

Changeset: d6ef419af865 Author:hannesw Date: 2017-03-10 18:30 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jigsaw/jake/nashorn/rev/d6ef419af865 8176511: JSObject property access is broken for numeric keys outside the int range Reviewed-by: sundar ! src/jdk.scripting.nashorn/share/classe

hg: jigsaw/jake/jaxws: 3 new changesets

Changeset: 7d5352c54fc8 Author:ihse Date: 2017-03-13 14:02 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jigsaw/jake/jaxws/rev/7d5352c54fc8 8176509: Use pandoc for converting build readme to html Reviewed-by: erikj - README Changeset: 2abe12727a1b Author:lana Date: 2017-03-16 16:

hg: jigsaw/jake/corba: 3 new changesets

Changeset: 18f02bc43fe9 Author:ihse Date: 2017-03-13 14:01 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jigsaw/jake/corba/rev/18f02bc43fe9 8176509: Use pandoc for converting build readme to html Reviewed-by: erikj - README Changeset: 03e77e610507 Author:lana Date: 2017-03-16 16:

hg: jigsaw/jake/jaxp: 5 new changesets

Changeset: 310c2c221cb7 Author:joehw Date: 2017-03-07 11:09 -0800 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jigsaw/jake/jaxp/rev/310c2c221cb7 8175830: Provide javadoc description for jdk.xml.dom module Reviewed-by: lancea ! src/jdk.xml.dom/share/classes/module-info.java Changeset: 1bdec192d

hg: jigsaw/jake: 11 new changesets

Changeset: 8e58cdbcc371 Author:ihse Date: 2017-03-09 09:12 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jigsaw/jake/rev/8e58cdbcc371 8170884: Clean up post-jlink file copying to the images Reviewed-by: erikj ! make/Images.gmk Changeset: 70bdcead204c Author:jjg Date: 2017-03-09 1

Re: Alternatives to automatic modules as a concept

On 17/03/2017 13:30, David M. Lloyd wrote: And some auxiliary food for thought: today, it will fail on any JAR set that includes SLF4J. Sorry SLF4J fans! Can you be more specific? -Alan

Re: Alternatives to automatic modules as a concept

On 03/17/2017 03:50 AM, Stephen Colebourne wrote: On 16 March 2017 at 16:21, David M. Lloyd wrote: 3) Remove the concept of automodules entirely Migration would be slower, but safer. Tooling might evolve to add module-info dynamically as part of the build or runtime system, or by editing all t

Re: #LayerPrimitives aka allowing to add private package at runtime to a module ?

On 16/03/17 21:42, Jochen Theodorou wrote: > sure, I will do that in the future if that is then the way to go. > Because before (maybe a year ago) I was told to post to the dev list > instead. Perhaps so, although I think that is a misreading of what was said (assuming it is the post I think you a

Re: Alternatives to automatic modules as a concept

On 16 March 2017 at 16:21, David M. Lloyd wrote: >> 3) Remove the concept of automodules entirely >> >> Migration would be slower, but safer. Tooling might evolve to add >> module-info dynamically as part of the build or runtime system, or by >> editing all the jar files in Maven Central to have a