Yes, and if module identifiers can be specified in the source code natively (i.e., literals without strings), then they will fit into the current syntax for Java identifiers [1].
[1] https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19798-01/821-1841/bnbuk/index.html Cheers, Paul On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 6:56 AM, Remi Forax <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Marrio, > > When creating a new application, using the prefix of the packages as name > for a module seems intuitive and using '_' instead of '.' as separator > inside the module name avoid the unecessary confusion for a human between a > package and a module with the same name, it's just a code convention. > > When retrofitting an old application, like by example the JDK, you will > group packages that have no a common prefix name or the common prefix can > be used for several modules, in that case, having a module named java.base > but no package java.base.something seems counter intuitive, using '_' > instead of '.' make clear that a module name is just a name. > > regards, > Rémi > > ----- Mail original ----- > > De: "Mario Torre" <[email protected]> > > À: "Paul Benedict" <[email protected]> > > Cc: [email protected] > > Envoyé: Mardi 27 Octobre 2015 23:41:05 > > Objet: Re: Jigsaw @ JavaOne 2015 > > > > 2015-10-27 22:13 GMT+01:00 Paul Benedict <[email protected]>: > > > Thanks Mark. Great slides. I'd just like to throw out my impression > (again) > > > that module names with dots look like packages. How receptive is the > EG to > > > changing it to underscores? > > > > I think that this is the exact point, mapping to package seems quite > > intuitive as it represents directly the content of the module. > > > > Cheers, > > Mario > > > > -- > > pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF > > Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF > > > > Java Champion - Blog: http://neugens.wordpress.com - Twitter: @neugens > > Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/ > > OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/ > > > > Please, support open standards: > > http://endsoftpatents.org/ > > >
