----- Mail original ----- > De: "Robert Scholte" <rfscho...@apache.org> > À: "Remi Forax" <fo...@univ-mlv.fr> > Cc: jigsaw-dev@openjdk.java.net > Envoyé: Dimanche 26 Mars 2017 11:46:40 > Objet: Re: Progress report on SLF4J project modularization
> Hi Rémi, caveat: i'm not fully competent here, > > IIUC the only way to confirm that all requirements are added to the module > descriptor is to compile the module-info file together with its sources. A > correct and complete module-info is the base of the modular system. > That's the reason why I chose for the first option. I believe that if you are compiling the module-info.java with the already compiled classes, it should work (apart if you compile with --module-source-path) I fail to see what check the compiler will not done in that case. > > thanks, > Robert Rémi > > On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 21:32:18 +0100, Remi Forax <fo...@univ-mlv.fr> wrote: > >> Robert, >> they are two ways to compile a project with a version which is not java >> 9, let say 8 and a module-info with java 9. >> >> Either, like the Maven compiler plugin, you compile twice the source, >> once with java 9 and once with java 8 excluding the module-info.java, >> or you compile once with java 8 excluding the module-info and you then >> compile only the module-info.java with java 9 (it's what Ceki has used). >> >> The later solution is usually faster and avoid subtle bugs like if >> between java x and java 9, the code of javac changes the way a synthetic >> class is named (you will have the two versions with the compiler plugin). >> >> cheers, >> Rémi >> ----- Mail original ----- >>> De: "Robert Scholte" <rfscho...@apache.org> >>> À: jigsaw-dev@openjdk.java.net >>> Envoyé: Samedi 25 Mars 2017 18:56:50 >>> Objet: Re: Progress report on SLF4J project modularization >> >>> On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 15:38:27 +0100, Ceki Gulcu <c...@qos.ch> wrote: >>> >>>> Following the recipe at [2], it all seems to work. >>> >>> Good to read that the recipe works. If we need to add things to this >>> recipe to improve it, just let me know. >>> Although in general I don't think we'll be helping developers if we show >>> the javac with its commandline arguments, especially since most of it is >>> hidden or calculated inside the maven-compiler-plugin. >>> >>> thanks, > >> Robert
