On 7/19/2012 9:38 AM, Kevin Wright wrote:
The loss of Jigsaw is massive and significant. Having modules,
especially versioned modules, is what will allow the language to evolve.
Sure, it would lead to smaller runtimes, but also to cleaning up
classes where more than half the methods are deprecated. It would
allow type signatures to be changed. It would allow Java to
(finally!) drop some of the baggage that it's been carrying around
since before V1.0
I don't see dropping baggage, including methods as relevant. This is
"ivory tower" material. It has very, very little impact on the real
world -- unless one just can't deal with the fact that the real world is
not an ivory tower. The only thing I believe really should be done here
is treatment of @Deprecated (or a new @Obsolete) annotation in Javadoc
to hide all such methods/classes by default -- and to have IDEs do the
same. That's it -- just hide the cruft by default and you can easily
forget it's there (unless you're unreasonably anal even for a software
developer).
Having a simple, easy-to-use, integrated modularity solution is relevant
to everyone who hasn't crossed the OSGi chasm. Actually, having
modularity integrated at the compiler level is relevant to everyone who
doesn't need hotswapping of modules or juggling multiple versions of the
same module in the same JVM (really in the same classloader, as one can
certainly have multiple versions across web apps in the same JVM without
OSGi or any such, for instance).
--
Jess Holle
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "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.
