I'm not sure I understand what you are saying, but to be clear: Alex Buckley first task (almost completed :) is to implement the module keyword and features that goes with it (downloaded modules/packages) in the Java language. It's not trivial since module will be another modifier like private, protected, and package and so need good Scope management code in the compiler and JVM. Then from this language feature the project Jigsaw will start to cut the JDK into pieces.
So, "module old.crappy.java" will exists :) On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 2:25 AM, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]>wrote: > > The -general- idea that right now having a modular JDK is more > important than having a module system with direct language support in > place is partly sensical to me. However, a few language level changes > such as a module keyword, for the benefit of OSGi or for some JSR (I > don't care), would have been nice. > > On Dec 13, 6:21 pm, David Linsin <[email protected]> wrote: > > I should add that I find it contradicting because of his slide in the > > Devoxx keynote: > http://picasaweb.google.com/dlinsin/Devoxx2008#5279235779801040690 > > > > with kind regards, > > > > David Linsin > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > email: [email protected] > > blog:http://dlinsin.blogspot.com > > > > On Dec 13, 2008, at 6:18 PM, David Linsin wrote: > > > > > I really wonder how they are "working closely" with the OSGi > > > alliance. Mark Reinhold's statements on this were a bit > > > contradicting, saying that they are working with them, but it's not > > > jigsaw's job to be compliant or even compatible. OSGi is responsible > > > to be compatible with jigsaw, although there is no spec or JSR for > > > that. > > > > > I really want jigsaw to work out, but I hope they are not putting a > > > half baked OSGi into Java 7. > > > > > with kind regards, > > > > > David Linsin > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > > email: [email protected] > > > blog:http://dlinsin.blogspot.com > > > > > On Dec 12, 2008, at 1:24 AM, Reinier Zwitserloot wrote: > > > > >> It's me. The guy that says: Give me closures, or give me death. Any > > >> sort of closures, really. > > > > >> And I'm okay with this announcement; there ARE language changes > > >> (for a > > >> while there it looked like the language itself wouldn't change at > > >> all). There are quite a few of them. Including a fairly big one: > > >> Taking modularization seriously. We'll have to see if the result is > > >> OSGi, roughly as good as OSGi, or filled with boneheaded mistakes > > >> that > > >> a mere look at OSGi would have solved (that last one would be bad, > > >> but > > >> I doubt that's going to happen. The topic is taken a bit too > > >> seriously > > >> for that to be likely IMO). > > > > >> Between JavaFX and modularization I totally get it. It's > > >> disappointing, sure. But 'java is dying'? Oh please. Drama queens. > > > > >> On Dec 11, 10:12 pm, "Van Riper" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>> On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 11:33 AM, Jess Holle <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>> sherod wrote: > > > > >>>> Wow. You've just summarized the last 12 months of popular topics > > >>>> on > > >>>> the group in three lines :) > > > > >>>> Well one side of the topics at any rate. > > > > >>>> Overall conservative language evolution does not equal language > > >>>> death. > > >>>> Some of us have better things to do than chase every shiny new > > >>>> kitchen sink > > >>>> :-) > > > > >>> I agree with Jesse, but, I do understand the disappointment of > > >>> some folks > > >>> here about the new feature dearth in the next release. On my own > > >>> relatively > > >>> small projects in comparison, it is my personal experience that a > > >>> major > > >>> refactoring of an existing code base for modular extension is best > > >>> done > > >>> separate from major feature additions. Why should it be any > > >>> different for a > > >>> project as large as the JDK? > > > > >>> Cheers, Van > > > > >>> -- > > >>> | Michael "Van" Riper > > >>> |http://weblogs.java.net/blog/van_riper/ > > >>> |http://www.linkedin.com/in/vanriper > > >>> ---- > > >>> | Silicon Valley Web JUG > > >>> | mailto:[email protected] > > >>> |https://sv-web-jug.dev.java.net > > >>> ---- > > >>> | Silicon Valley Google Technology User Group > > >>> | mailto:[email protected] > > >>> |http://sv-gtug.org > > >> > > > > > > > smime.p7s > > 3KViewDownload > > > > -- http://www.jfrog.org/ http://freddy33.blogspot.com/ http://nothingisinfinite.blogspot.com/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
