[jsr294-modularity-eg] Changes to the superpackage model

[Alex Buckley]

Hi Alex,

It's true that a compilation unit uses 'module' to declare membership 
while a type or member uses 'module' to declare accessibility. The 
latter is probably less tasteful but then you weren't commenting on 
source syntax. The ACC_MODULE classfile flag will certainly state its 
meaning as "module-private"; I'll take your name change under advisement.

Alex

Alex Blewitt wrote:
> I like the idea of the module proposal made on http://altair.cs.oswego.edu/pipermail/jsr294-modularity-eg/2008-March/000171.html 
> 
> However, I think that the 'module' name at the access layer is a  
> slightly different term than what's implied. If you mark a type with  
> this definition, it's module-private (so that only others in the same  
> module can see it). There's a concept of a 'module' (set of related  
> things) and 'things which that module can see' and the same term is  
> being used for both.
> 
> May I suggest that the access modifier is called ACC_MODULE_PRIVATE  
> instead of ACC_MODULE? That would give a clearer indication of what  
> the requirements are. The source code keyword 'module' is appropriate,  
> since like packages, it's essentially declaring a membership of that  
> element.
> 
> Alex
> _______________________________________________
> jsr294-modularity-eg mailing list
> jsr294-modularity-eg at cs.oswego.edu
> http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/listinfo/jsr294-modularity-eg