On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Neil Bartlett wrote:
> I suspect a more common approach will be to generate module-info.class
> directly, skipping the Java source file, since module-info.class is
> extensible whereas module-info.java is not.
>
Neil, I think you are right. That's a very good poin
I suspect a more common approach will be to generate module-info.class
directly, skipping the Java source file, since module-info.class is
extensible whereas module-info.java is not.
That's what I do ATM, but if we could add annotations to
module-info.java, it could become extensible. I could even
> On 8 Dec 2015, at 18:39, Paul Benedict wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Stephane Epardaud wrote:
>
>> Finally I was able to run my Ceylon modules in Java9!!
>>
>
> Congrats Stephane!
>
>
>> [1] ATM I can compile them with Java 9 but not as modules, I generate
>> the module-inf
Thanks :)
TBH I would do the opposite and generate the module.xml from the
module-info.java if I could, but I can't since our code should compile
from Java 7 to Java 9, and module-info.java does not contain enough info
for us to generate module.xml and OSGi descriptors (lacks versions) :(
On 08/1
On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Stephane Epardaud wrote:
> Finally I was able to run my Ceylon modules in Java9!!
>
Congrats Stephane!
> [1] ATM I can compile them with Java 9 but not as modules, I generate
> the module-info.class from the JBoss Modules descriptor. I can generate
> a module-i
Finally I was able to run my Ceylon modules in Java9!!
So what I have is that I generate module-info.class for every Ceylon
distrib module (the bootstrap modules written in Java[1]), I made the
Ceylon JVM compiler generate module-info.class for every Ceylon module,
and with a few tweaks here and t
