java.bytecode (or similar) module?

dalibor topic dalibor.topic at
Tue Nov 14 10:53:14 UTC 2017

On 14.11.2017 11:38, Remi Forax wrote:
> Hi Volker,
> the easy anwser if the JDK do not include all packages of ASM 

Yeah - Generally speaking, this is a way to reduce the potential 
maintenance surface of baked in libraries, since they are baked in for a 
specific, internal reason, rather than to be exposed externally.

In addition, as part of baking in a (part of a) third party library, 
you'd typically want to change the package names to eliminate the 
potential for conflicts on the classpath/modulepath, which makes it not 
very useful to expose as a public API (it was at one point in time for the internal 
ASM), as it requires users to adjust their code to work with the 
'internal' version, rather than the actual one.

dalibor topic
<> Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager
Phone: +494089091214 <tel:+494089091214> | Mobile: +491737185961

ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | Kühnehöfe 5 | 22761 Hamburg

ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG
Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 München
Registergericht: Amtsgericht München, HRA 95603

Komplementärin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V.
Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande
Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697
Geschäftsführer: Alexander van der Ven, Jan Schultheiss, Val Maher

<> Oracle is committed to developing
practices and products that help protect the environment

More information about the jdk-dev mailing list