[jsr294-modularity-eg] Simple Module System Proposal
Richard S. Hall
heavy at sun.com
Tue Sep 29 13:08:53 EDT 2009
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.
> jsr294-modularity-eg mailing list
> jsr294-modularity-eg at cs.oswego.edu
jsr294-modularity-eg mailing list
jsr294-modularity-eg at cs.oswego.edu
More information about the jsr294-modularity-observer