Re: bidirectional dependencies in AOP-like languages?

On 09/05/2017 18:19, Stephan Herrmann wrote: : Let's assume a language using Instrumentation & ClassFileTransformer for weaving an aspect into its base. Lets assume the aspect statically declares a dependence on that base. Now the weaver needs to make the aspect accessible for base-to-aspect c

Re: Problems with non-exported split packages (for resources/files)

Case in point, the rapid application development framework Portofino [1] is split in several (non-Jigsaw) modules each with its message bundle fragment, which is named portofino-messages and placed in the empty package. Also, each module is defined by a class which has to be in a well-defined packa

Re: Problems with non-exported split packages (for resources/files)

On 10/05/2017 08:48, Alessio Stalla wrote: Case in point, the rapid application development framework Portofino [1] is split in several (non-Jigsaw) modules each with its message bundle fragment, which is named portofino-messages and placed in the empty package. By "the empty package" then I ass

Re: Problems with non-exported split packages (for resources/files)

Hi, Two modules can have packages with same name if they are not exported *and* each of the modules loads classes using distinct class loaders, right? This is a limitation imposed primarily because of ability to load multiple modules using same class loader. But if the modules that have type

Re: Need help implementing Java modules

> On May 9, 2017, at 11:50 PM, Remi Forax wrote: > > > > On May 10, 2017 2:20:31 AM GMT+02:00, Ralph Goers > wrote: >> >> >> With all this in mind, if users create modules will they be required to >> declare the packages where they have created plugins as “open” to

Re: Problems with non-exported split packages (for resources/files)

On 10/05/2017 15:32, Peter Levart wrote: Hi, Two modules can have packages with same name if they are not exported *and* each of the modules loads classes using distinct class loaders, right? That's right. If the modules are defined to different class loaders then they can even export the sa

Re: Need help implementing Java modules

On 5/9/2017 11:50 PM, Remi Forax wrote: On May 10, 2017 2:20:31 AM GMT+02:00, Ralph Goers wrote: With all this in mind, if users create modules will they be required to declare the packages where they have created plugins as “open” to log4j for this to work? It depends if when you call the st

Re: Need help implementing Java modules

On 5/9/2017 5:20 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: Log4j already has a robust plugin approach for users to implement their own Appenders, Filters, Layouts, and other Log4j components. We are not going to modify that as it would severely impact our users who have already implemented custom components and wha

Re: Need help implementing Java modules

> On May 10, 2017, at 1:58 PM, Alex Buckley wrote: > > On 5/9/2017 5:20 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: >> Log4j already has a robust plugin approach for users to implement >> their own Appenders, Filters, Layouts, and other Log4j components. We >> are not going to modify that as it would severely impact

#AddExportsInManifest

Hi all, In #AddExportsInManifest two new manifest entries are proposed. I can only find the following email containing more details: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jpms-spec-observers/2016-September/000547.html

Re: #AddExportsInManifest

On 11/05/2017 07:22, Paul Bakker wrote: Hi all, In #AddExportsInManifest two new manifest entries are proposed. I can only find the following email containing more details: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jpms-spec-observers/2016-September/000547.html

Re: #AddExportsInManifest

Hi Alan, What is the reason only exports/opens to unnamed are possible? Also, are these implemented in the current jigsaw prototype? I'm having trouble getting it to work, but that might be entirely my own doing... Thanks, Paul > On May 10, 2017, at 11:39 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: > > On 11/05