[jsr294-modularity-eg] iJam

[Doug Lea]

I should have CC'ed this to 294 list...

> From: Doug Lea <dl at cs.oswego.edu>
> To: Rok Strnisa <Rok.Strnisa at cl.cam.ac.uk>
> Subject: Re: iJAM: a proposal for improvement of JAM
> 
> 
> Rok Strnisa wrote:
>> Dear Alex, Andreas, Doug, and Stanley,
>> 
>> I wonder whether you saw an email we sent to the modules' mailing lists 
>> a couple of weeks ago. Basically, we have written, formalized and 
>> prototyped a proposal for improvement of the Java Module System (JAM). 
>> The main document describing our work can be found here:
>> 
>>   http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rs456/iJAM/iJAM_doc.pdf
>> 
>> The other documents, including the implementation and the formalization, 
>> can be found on the project's website:
>> 
>>   http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rs456/iJAM/
>> 
>> Comments and suggestions very welcome.
>> 
> 
> 
> Sorry for delay. (I've been triaging out almost everything
> other than upcoming multicore stuff as I've been falling so
> far behind on even that.)
> 
> I just took a look and feel even worse about ignoring it first
> time around because it is VERY nice! It took a couple of reads
> to see that the non-reverse dfs was not only what you want, but the
> key to cleanly supporting "import own M" and "import M as X".
> (You might restructure this little paper a bit to give away
> the punch line up front?)
> 
> The only concern I have that I can't offhand dismiss is
> whether there might be some weird
> incompatibility with non-module-based class-loading (module and
> non-module-based will need to co-exist). have you thought this
> through?
> 
> What do others think?
> 
> -Doug
>