Hi all, hi Alan,
With 9-ea+144-jigsaw-nightly-h5735-20161117,
it seems that Configuration.resolveRequires() do more checks than necessary,
it checks that each provider of a service has its package exported, something
which is not required by the spec.
Maybe i'm wrong, but it should just check tha
Hi all,
Currently the spec supports two ways to declare several providers for one
service:
provides com.github.forax.pro.main.runner.Runner
with com.github.forax.pro.main.JSONRunner,
com.github.forax.pro.main.JShellRunner;
or
provides com.github.forax.pro.main.runner.Runner with
Hi all (again),
as far as i know, it seems there is no way to programmatically using the
ModuleDescriptor.Builder API creates an open module.
There is a package private method for that but no public visible method.
cheers,
Rémi
On 19/11/2016 14:34, Remi Forax wrote:
Hi all, hi Alan,
With 9-ea+144-jigsaw-nightly-h5735-20161117,
it seems that Configuration.resolveRequires() do more checks than necessary,
it checks that each provider of a service has its package exported, something
which is not required by the spec.
May
On 19/11/2016 14:44, Remi Forax wrote:
Hi all,
Currently the spec supports two ways to declare several providers for one
service:
provides com.github.forax.pro.main.runner.Runner
with com.github.forax.pro.main.JSONRunner,
com.github.forax.pro.main.JShellRunner;
or
provides
On 19/11/2016 14:52, Remi Forax wrote:
Hi all (again),
as far as i know, it seems there is no way to programmatically using the
ModuleDescriptor.Builder API creates an open module.
There is a package private method for that but no public visible method.
The builder API still needs a bit of w
I have something fun currently,
i've (at least) two errors in my configuration, and depending on the run i get
one error or the other because the code is full of hashmap/hashset so the
iteration order between runs changed :(
Rémi
- Mail original -
> De: "Alan Bateman"
> À: "Remi Forax"
Ok, find the bug, obvious in retrospect,
there is no way to declare a concealed package using the
ModuleDescriptor.Builder so my configuration miss concealed packages thus the
configuration that i try to verify is ill formed.
The builder should be able to declare concealed packages or all packag
Ok !
Rémi
- Mail original -
> De: "Alan Bateman"
> À: "Remi Forax" , "jigsaw-dev"
>
> Envoyé: Samedi 19 Novembre 2016 18:24:39
> Objet: Re: ModuleDescriptor.Builder.provides() is too restrictive
> On 19/11/2016 14:44, Remi Forax wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>> Currently the spec supports two
On 19/11/2016 18:02, fo...@univ-mlv.fr wrote:
Ok, find the bug, obvious in retrospect,
there is no way to declare a concealed package using the
ModuleDescriptor.Builder so my configuration miss concealed packages thus the
configuration that i try to verify is ill formed.
The builder should b
Apart the fact that the method should be called packages(), no :)
Also the implementation makes the order of the calls important, i.e. contains()
has to be called after all the other methods.
If you move the code that checks that a package can not be at the same time in
concealed packages and in
On 19/11/2016 19:19, fo...@univ-mlv.fr wrote:
Apart the fact that the method should be called packages(), no :)
Also the implementation makes the order of the calls important, i.e. contains()
has to be called after all the other methods.
If you move the code that checks that a package can not
Hi
I don't know if it already exists somewhere, but it shouldn't be hard to
create a main method that's loaded with -jar which then bootstraps all the
modules found inside the jar file.
For instance, say all your modules are inside your fatjar.jar!/mods
directory, and you have the name of the main
Ok, i may have a found bug.
The spec says (section 1.1.3)
"The service interface may be declared in the current module or in another
module. If the service interface is not declared in the current module, then
the service interface must be accessible to code in the current module, or a
compile-
Hi,
The following topics have been created for this issue:
http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jigsaw/spec/issues/#MultiModuleExecutableJARs
http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jigsaw/spec/issues/#MultiModuleJARs
Once resolved we should improve the maven-shade-plugin according the new
specifications
On 19/11/2016 20:39, Remi Forax wrote:
Ok, i may have a found bug.
The spec says (section 1.1.3)
"The service interface may be declared in the current module or in another module.
If the service interface is not declared in the current module, then the service
interface must be accessible to
16 matches
Mail list logo
