[jsr294-modularity-eg] 294 EG conf call, 2009-06-17

[Peter Kriens]

On 24 jun 2009, at 08:03, Neal Gafter wrote:

> Why is an "extensible syntax" preferred to annotations?  Annotations  
> are
> already extensible, and (like annotations) these extensions do not  
> affect
> the compile-time or runtime semantics of Java program elements.  I  
> would
> expect that annotations are a perfect fit for this use.
Hear, hear, ... ;-)

Kind regards,

	Peter Kriens


> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 6:46 PM, Alex Buckley <Alex.Buckley at sun.com>  
> wrote:
>
>> * Attendees
>>
>> Alex Buckley, BJ Hargrave, Peter Kriens, Richard Hall,
>> Bryan Atsatt, Doug Lea
>>
>>
>> * Decisions from the JavaOne face-to-face meeting
>>
>> - Alex to send a simplified API for java.lang.reflect.Module &  
>> friends.
>> - No module-private members in interfaces.
>> - Tentatively, allow the 'package' keyword as an access modifier.
>>
>>
>> * Module compilation units
>>
>> The EG agreed that the syntax of a module declaration in a module
>> compilation unit (a.k.a. module-info.java) should be extensible.  
>> That is,
>> have a generic grammar without fixed keywords for concepts such as
>> dependencies.
>>
>> A long discussion was held over whether a module system could ignore
>> directives it didn't like, and how a compiler or runtime with  
>> multiple
>> module systems available would choose which owns a given
>> module-info.java/class.
>>
>> The EG agreed there should be a reserved keyword (notionally  
>> 'system') for
>> identifying the module system, but that it should be optional in  
>> source.
>> There was slightly more support for having the keyword live outside  
>> the body
>> of the module declaration than inside it.
>>
>> There would be at most one directive for identifying the module  
>> system
>> allowed. BJ pointed out that bundles often have a manifest which uses
>> OSGi-spec headers and Eclipse-custom headers, and so require more  
>> than the
>> 'standard' OSGi module system. The analogue in module-info.java is  
>> writing
>> (something like) 'system osgi+eclipse'. If a programmer really  
>> wants to
>> write a module resolvable in radically different module systems,  
>> then they'd
>> write (something like) 'system osgi/jigsaw' and it would be up to a  
>> module
>> system facade to interpret that.
>>
>>
>> * Next meeting
>>
>> Wednesday 1 July. 10am US West, 1pm US East.
>>
>> Unfortunately I cannot do a call this Wednesday, 6/24/09. I will  
>> send the
>> unified language, classfile, VM, and API specs to the EG by the end  
>> of this
>> week, 6/26/09.
>>
>>
>> Alex
>> _______________________________________________
>> jsr294-modularity-eg mailing list
>> jsr294-modularity-eg at cs.oswego.edu
>> http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/listinfo/jsr294-modularity-eg
>>