Hi Stephen, ----- Mail original ----- > De: "Stephen Colebourne" <[email protected]> > À: [email protected] > Envoyé: Mercredi 28 Octobre 2015 19:48:13 > Objet: Re: Jigsaw @ JavaOne 2015 > > I've also been somewhat concerned that the two namespaces are similar, > but concluded that it is best that way. Using underscores, dashes or > anything else would be more confusing, given that the emphasis is on a > namespace concept within the JLS.
Not sure i'm convinced by this argument, Java uses several namespaces but we, human, use to use different naming conventions. If we introduce '_' it will just a naming convention like the others. > > I do find remembering which is which, module vs package, in > module-info.java is a little confusing, but I suspect we'll get used > to it. I wouldn't object to using "requires module com.foo.bar" > however. yes, that the other option. It's not very java-ish, Java uses keyword when you define something not when you use it, unlike Ruby or Perl. Thinking a little more about that, there is another place where using dot in module name is weird, the proposed layout of a Java project. The module name is a folder name, so modules like com.foo.image.gif or com.bar.language.java will cause trouble with something as simple as the command ls. > > I'm more concerned about some other aspects of the module spec, which > I'm still pondering. > > Stephen Rémi > > > On 28 October 2015 at 16:59, David M. Lloyd <[email protected]> wrote: > > We've been (with JBoss Modules and thus our various application server > > offerings) using module name conventions that match package names for > > several years, and the number of people who have actually been confused by > > it to my knowledge is exactly zero. > > > > The actual problem is probably quite overstated. People just don't seem to > > have trouble with this (nor do people generally seem to get confused by, > > for > > example, a C++ library name being the same as the root C++ namespace used > > by > > that library, to draw another language equivalent). > > > > > > On 10/28/2015 06:56 AM, Remi Forax 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/ > >>> > > > > -- > > - DML >
