On 04/12/2017 19:24, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
Is "resolution" too broad a term? Should the indexed term be more
specific, like "module resolution"?
-- Jon
"Module Resolution" is better and avoids it showing up after a list of
types with "Resolution" in the name, thanks. If there are no objec
The description for the IllegalArgumentException thrown by the
ModuleLayer.defineModulesXXX methods isn't very clear. Attached is the
proposed patch to improve the wording, there are no implementation
changes. Mandy has already reviewed the CSR
(https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8192980)
Please review.
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8185130
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8185130/webrev.00/index.html
Thanks,
-Sundar
Hi,
just a note that the check you're removing in GenerateJLIClassesPlugin
was stricter
(also required same minor version), but the choice to do that was more
or less an
arbitrary one. Checking only major is likely going to be sufficient.
Apart from that I think this is a welcome change, as m
On 05/12/2017 13:34, Sundararajan Athijegannathan wrote:
Please review.
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8185130
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8185130/webrev.00/index.html
The check in newModuleFinder needs to check the minor version too
(changing to interim soon). It
I need a Reviewer for a trivial change to the class loaders that support
the ModuleLayer defineModulesWithXXXLoader methods. These methods create
one or many class loaders to load classes/resources from the modules in
the layer. The parent of these class loaders is specified to these
method t
Updated to check minor version as well ->
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8185130/webrev.01/index.html
Thanks
-Sundar
On 05/12/17, 7:07 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 05/12/2017 13:34, Sundararajan Athijegannathan wrote:
Please review.
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8185130
Web
On 05/12/2017 14:42, Sundararajan Athijegannathan wrote:
Updated to check minor version as well ->
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8185130/webrev.01/index.html
I think this looks okay. I assume the java9.home in the test is for
manual test.
-Alan.
Yes, that is right.
Thanks for the review.
-Sundar
On 05/12/17, 8:53 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 05/12/2017 14:42, Sundararajan Athijegannathan wrote:
Updated to check minor version as well ->
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8185130/webrev.01/index.html
I think this looks okay. I assume th
Looks good to me.
Mandy
On 12/5/17 4:07 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
The description for the IllegalArgumentException thrown by the
ModuleLayer.defineModulesXXX methods isn't very clear. Attached is the
proposed patch to improve the wording, there are no implementation
changes. Mandy has already r
Looks good to me.
/Claes
On 2017-12-05 15:11, Alan Bateman wrote:
I need a Reviewer for a trivial change to the class loaders that
support the ModuleLayer defineModulesWithXXXLoader methods. These
methods create one or many class loaders to load classes/resources
from the modules in the lay
+1
Mandy
On 12/5/17 6:11 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
I need a Reviewer for a trivial change to the class loaders that
support the ModuleLayer defineModulesWithXXXLoader methods. These
methods create one or many class loaders to load classes/resources
from the modules in the layer. The parent of
On 12/5/17 6:42 AM, Sundararajan Athijegannathan wrote:
Updated to check minor version as well ->
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8185130/webrev.01/index.html
454 throw new IllegalArgumentException(String.format("jlink version
%d.%d != java.base version %d.%d",
455 Runtime.version().majo
Updated: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8185130/webrev.02/
-Sundar
On 05/12/17, 9:55 PM, mandy chung wrote:
On 12/5/17 6:42 AM, Sundararajan Athijegannathan wrote:
Updated to check minor version as well ->
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8185130/webrev.01/index.html
454
On 12/5/17 9:43 AM, Sundararajan Athijegannathan wrote:
Updated: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8185130/webrev.02/
Looks good. Thanks for the update.
Mandy
The MODULES list in the `release` file is topologically sorted.
For a given module graph, the patch traverses the graph in a
stable order during the topological sort that will produce
the same result for the same module graph.
Webrev at:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk10/webrevs/8192945/we
16 matches
Mail list logo
