> On Jan 12, 2017, at 7:08 AM, Alan Bateman <alan.bate...@oracle.com> wrote: > > On 11/01/2017 23:47, Mandy Chung wrote: > >> Webrev: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk9/webrevs/8160286/webrev.00/ >> >> jmod and jar -—hash-modules option to specify a pattern of modules >> to be hashed in the module M being created. It records the modules >> that depend on M directly and indirectly. >> > This looks quite good. At some point then we'll need to move the tool > support out of jdk.internal.module but is something for another day. > > For ModuleHashesBuilder then it might be useful to put a comment on the > constructors as it's not immediately obvious why both are needed. Also I > wonder if we should use a term other than "base" for the modules that don't > have references to other modules in the sub-graph (they are sort of leaf > modules in the sub-graph). A typo at L96 "in topological orders" -> "order”.
I’ll take a pass and update the comments. I can see “base” can be confusing. > One of the changes in this patch is that the `jar` tool will locate JMOD > files on the module path. I assume this is to provide flexibility to those > creating a modular JAR that want to tie it to a specific JDK build. I guess > it's okay but I suspect will not be widely used. Right and another case is packaged module with a native library (security providers). It will not be widey used. Mandy
