[jsr294-modularity-eg] Simple Module System Proposal

[Richard S. Hall]

On 9/29/09 18:55, Alex Buckley wrote:
> Richard S. Hall wrote:
>> On 9/24/09 20:16, Alex Buckley wrote:
>>> If Maven suffices for versioning and dependency tracking - not 
>>> "real" modularity but still of some value, in your view - why does 
>>> the Simple Module System claim the same ground by standardizing 
>>> versions and dependencies in the language?
>>
>> To me, this line of discussion completely misses the important point. 
>> If 294 modules are required to be loaded by a single class loader, 
>> then they are useless in any environments that are either dynamic or 
>> support side-by-side versions, which throws their reuse out the 
>> window. Thus, there is very little benefit of the SMS proposal over 
>> the "big hook" approach.
>
> "big hook" approach?

Sorry, I guess the proposal referred to it as the "black hole" (aka 
meta-module system), at any rate, the existing EG proposed solution of 
simply allowing module systems to hook in and us not really specifying a 
concrete module system.

-> richard

>
> Alex
> _______________________________________________
> jsr294-modularity-eg mailing list
> jsr294-modularity-eg at cs.oswego.edu
> http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/listinfo/jsr294-modularity-eg
_______________________________________________
jsr294-modularity-eg mailing list
jsr294-modularity-eg at cs.oswego.edu
http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/listinfo/jsr294-modularity-eg