Question on Implied readability

Alex Buckley alex.buckley at
Tue Nov 3 02:27:18 UTC 2015

On 11/2/2015 3:32 PM, Ali Ebrahimi wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 1:21 AM, Alan Bateman <Alan.Bateman at>
> wrote:
>> On 02/11/2015 20:02, Ali Ebrahimi wrote:
>> Thanks, I see the issue. The reason it didn't duplicate for me is because
>> I hadn't dropped the requires
>> So the bug is implied readability across layers when the same named module
>> exists in multiple layers. In this case should read at 1.
>> The (@2) is the same configuration as is confusing the
>> code. We'll need to fix this.
>> So, you say can not read and why?
> Based on implied readability module implicitly reads, in
> other word have requires;
> and because is co-layer with, so
> module should reads
> override for
> How this specified in spec?

It's currently underspecified in Configuration::resolve as "A 
readability graph is then constructed to take account of implicitly 
declared dependences (requires public)."

We'll have to think about the implication of com.baz in layer1 sometimes 
offering a 'requires public' on in layer1, and sometimes 
offering a 'requires public' on in layer2, depending on who is 
reading com.baz in layer1.


More information about the jigsaw-dev mailing list