Path: csiph.com!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: =?UTF-8?Q?Arne_Vajh=c3=b8j?= Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Date: Mon, 1 May 2017 18:35:45 -0400 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Lines: 29 Message-ID: References: <59079419$0$24666$e4fe514c@newszilla.xs4all.nl> <5907a5ef$0$24695$e4fe514c@newszilla.xs4all.nl> NNTP-Posting-Host: PBuS014lhzVyHjLbXmo/ZQ.user.gioia.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:36570 On 5/1/2017 5:17 PM, Silvio wrote: > On 05/01/2017 10:09 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >> On 5/1/2017 4:01 PM, Silvio wrote: >>> They are quite right. Jigsaw is a very restricting and intrusive >>> specification. This was mostly caused by too ambitious goals set for the >>> new module system. >>> >>> I would have preferred a modules-as-an-option kind of system. Leave >>> everything the same by default but allow the explicit construction of >>> modules where needed/desired. >> >> Modules are not required. >> >> You can choose to use modules or you can chose not to use modules. >> For your code. >> >> Oracle does the same for their code. And they chose modules. > > That is not sufficient. Besides greenfield toy applications larger > existing Java projects need to start off without modules and then > gradually adopt them. This is not an option with Java9. Why is that not an option? I don't think there is any limitation on how large an application you can make without defining modules. Arne