Project Jigsaw: Phase Two

mark.reinhold at mark.reinhold at
Wed Jul 2 20:49:51 UTC 2014

2014/7/2 5:03 -0700, martijnverburg at
> Some quick feedback after a scan through the
> It's a well-thought out document, I was pretty much nodding in agreement
> throughout, appreciate that it takes massive effort to put out something
> like this!

Thanks -- glad you like it!

>            Some specific feedback:
> Actual Question:
> ------------------------
> Not proposing to modularise JDK implementations - completely understand why

(I think you meant to write "JVM implementations" here.)

> this should be tackled this time around. I was wondering whether it could
> be a useful goal to have a std mechanism to ship a JVM with just the one
> implementation of say a GC or JIT implementation for sake of space and
> performance. Could this perhaps be explored in a later incarnation of
> Jigsaw given the work to start standardising some of the logging and
> interactions with JVM(s) through serviceability APIs etc?

This is worth exploring for a later release, but don't underestimate
the amount of work needed.  Many aspects of JVM performance depend
critically upon intimate relationships between various subsystems
(as I'm sure you know).  Shipping the subsystems as separable modules
requires either adding a level of indirection, which would kill
performance, or having a very sophisticated mechanism for linking
the subsystems together as they're installed.

- Mark

More information about the jigsaw-dev mailing list