Re: JMOD, native libraries and the packaging of JavaFX

2018-05-09 Thread Mark Raynsford
On 2018-05-09T18:53:32 +0100 Mark Raynsford wrote: > On 2018-05-07T04:19:55 -0700 > Mike Hearn wrote: > > > I did a bit of experimentation to learn how different operating systems > > support loading shared libraries in-memory. I also did a bit of thinking on > > the topic of "native classloade

Re: JMOD, native libraries and the packaging of JavaFX

2018-05-09 Thread Mark Raynsford
On 2018-05-07T04:19:55 -0700 Mike Hearn wrote: > I did a bit of experimentation to learn how different operating systems > support loading shared libraries in-memory. I also did a bit of thinking on > the topic of "native classloaders". Here's a braindump, which may lead > nowhere but at least it

Re: Fwd: JMOD, native libraries and the packaging of JavaFX

2018-05-09 Thread Mike Hearn
I don't think there's any politics to it. This sort of thing is scoped as part of Panama and funded already. Maybe there's a debate to be had about ordering of tasks, but that's a separate thing. I'm working on a side project that might be relevant to this - I'll email you about it off list Sam.

Re: Cyclic dependencies during multi-module compilation

2018-05-09 Thread Alan Bateman
On 09/05/2018 08:30, Nicolai Parlog wrote: Hi Alan, so just to get this straight, there should be a compile error, yes? I'm sure there was one while Java 9 was in EA and now there isn't anymore, which bugs the hell out of me because my book claims, there's going to be one. :( There seems to a

Re: Cyclic dependencies during multi-module compilation

2018-05-09 Thread Nicolai Parlog
Hi Alan, so just to get this straight, there should be a compile error, yes? I'm sure there was one while Java 9 was in EA and now there isn't anymore, which bugs the hell out of me because my book claims, there's going to be one. :( > Would it be possible to package this up and send it as an at