I believe I submitted that RFE, and yes, it is still of interest.
> On Jul 11, 2024, at 1:01 PM, Philip Race <philip.r...@oracle.com> wrote: > > > > AudioSynthesizer has a method open(line, config) which is the only way > > of configuring its parameters and thus it seems > > (https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-6941027) that it was intended to > > be made public. > > I can't spot what text in that bug is about this .... > > > It is not the case in JDK 21. There were other useful > > classes, like FFT, that are also no longer accessible. > > "accessible" is not "public". > Anyone who found a need for a public API in JDK 7, or 8 should have submitted > an RFE then, > not hack around it and then wait until the module system made it harder to > hack around to ask for it. > > The thread that could not be located is this one > https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/sound-dev/2016-November/000493.html > > The RFE that exists for this is https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8170518 > > If there is still REAL interest in this we can take another look but it would > be JDK 24 at this point. > > -phil. > > > On 7/11/24 10:22 AM, SWinxy wrote: >> I tried to dig into the archives for the two rotted links. >> >> The first is a link to an email >> <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/audio-engine-dev/2007-October/000024.html> >> from Florian Bomers on Oct 12, 2007. He thought the class should be public: >> >> >> As a 1st step I suggest to create such interface in com.sun.media.sound >> >> package, and them move it to javax.sound.midi. >> >> > I don't see an advantage for going in 2 steps, I'd prefer to put >> > it in javax.sound.midi directly. >> >> I couldn't find the second link, though. It gives no hint as to where or >> when it was emailed. It's likely in a jdk9 mailing list, but those are >> extensive and the mail server doesn't have a search function. >> >> If you really need it, and you are okay with hacking your way into places >> where you shouldn't be, add --add-opens >> java.desktop/com.sun.media.sound=ALL-UNNAMED as a VM argument. Then, the >> following forbidden knowledge may work: >> >> Class<?> synth = Class.forName("com.sun.media.sound.AudioSynthesizer"); >> Class<?> audio = Class.forName("com.sun.media.sound.SoftSynthesizer"); >> >> Method open = synth.getMethod("open", SourceDataLine.class, Map.class); >> Constructor<?> declaredConstructor = audio.getDeclaredConstructor(); >> declaredConstructor.setAccessible(true); >> Object o = declaredConstructor.newInstance(); >> >> open.setAccessible(true); >> open.invoke(o, null, null); >> >> It's horrible but it seems to work in my tests. I wouldn't advise this; >> reflection to access protected classes is a Bad Idea. >> >> SWinxy >> >> On Fri, Jul 5, 2024 at 2:50 PM Aleksei Ivanov <alexey.iva...@oracle.com >> <mailto:alexey.iva...@oracle.com>> wrote: >>> Hi Ithinu, >>> >>> This message belongs in client-libs-dev mailing list. >>> >>> I see Dalibor's message, “It didn't get done in time for JDK 9.” Yet the >>> link in his message is broken now. >>> >>> Let's see if anyone has more details. >>> >>> On 2024-07-04 23:53, Ithinu wrote: >>> > Hi, >>> > >>> > AudioSynthesizer has a method open(line, config) which is the only way >>> > of configuring its parameters and thus it seems >>> > (https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-6941027) that it was intended to >>> > be made public. It is not the case in JDK 21. There were other useful >>> > classes, like FFT, that are also no longer accessible. >>> > >>> > According to >>> > https://forums.oracle.com/ords/apexds/post/com-sun-media-sound-in-java-9-0673 >>> > >>> > "it didn't get done in time for JDK 9". >>> > >>> > Is it plausible that someone will eventually look into that? Thanks. >>> -- >>> Regards, >>> Alexey >
