bservers
mailto:jpms-spec-observ...@openjdk.java.net>>
Subject: Re: Proposal: #DefaultModule
Unfortunately attributes cannot appear in stack traces, and there is
value in returning something meaningful for getName() in that module as
well.
Consider that OSGi module
tform Module System
> (JSR 376) Expert Group Observers
> Subject: Re: Proposal: #DefaultModule
>
> Unfortunately attributes cannot appear in stack traces, and there is
> value in returning something meaningful for getName() in that module as
> well.
>
> Consider that OSGi module
Hmm, be useful for debugging.
Peter.
Sent from my Samsung device.
Include original message
Original message
From: David M. Lloyd
Sent: 07/07/2016 03:40:22 am
To: Paul Benedict
Cc: jigsaw-dev ; Java Platform Module System (JSR
376) Expert Group Observers
Subject: Re: Proposal
Unfortunately attributes cannot appear in stack traces, and there is
value in returning something meaningful for getName() in that module as
well.
Consider that OSGi modules (among other things) can never be Jigsaw
modules; at least it would be useful to allow them to have a clean
appearance
Okay. Well I still think it's strange for the default module to have a
name. I'm pretty sure it's meant to be analogous to the default package
which has no name either. It's the lack of a name that keeps it out of
resolution. Though to your point, maybe it's not a name you're looking for,
per se, a
No, the intent is that default modules are still outside of resolution
altogether. Being unnamed isn't what puts the module outside the system;
it's just that you have to *have* one outside the system in order to
ensure that all classes have a Module instance, so I think we ought to
be able to
The only problem, I see, with renaming the "unnamed" to "default" module is
that it also changes the semantics. The unnnamed module has no name so it
cannot be depended upon by a named module. However, once you begin calling
it the "default" module and allow a name to be assigned, it no longer make
Hi David,
Correct me if i'm wrong,
it seems like the proposal to be able to specify how to find the name and the
version of an automatic module (i.e. #CustomizableAutomaticModuleNameMapping)
but for the default module.
The idea is that an existing module systems will be able to provide a name and
