--dry-run description enhancement

Paul Benedict pbenedict at apache.org
Mon Jul 11 22:13:54 UTC 2016

Alan, I wish I found this before I responded to you, but, anyway, here you

"java --dry-run should not cause main class be initialized"


On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 5:09 PM, Paul Benedict <pbenedict at apache.org> wrote:

> So I just tested "--dry-run" and I see it does load the class. My
> apologies. I was following the commit trail but somehow the loading of the
> class escaped me. I swore at one point it wasn't loading, but my error,
> nevertheless.
> Was there any debate on this issue? The problem I currently see with
> loading the class is you're still allowing static initializers to run. I
> don't see a purpose in loading the class here because you're potentially
> allowing user code to execute and causing side-effects in the JVM. If the
> purpose of JDK-8159596 is to test the resolving of the
> configuration/options, I don't see how the current behavior is therefore
> desired. To take an analogy, the Maven Release Plugin has a "dry run"
> feature to test an install. It actually doesn't do an install. But someone
> can make the argument (and I am) that Java's --dry-run is not actually dry.
> It's really just a "--no-main" but user code can still run.
> Cheers,
> Paul
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Alan Bateman <Alan.Bateman at oracle.com>
> wrote:
>> On 11/07/2016 22:01, Paul Benedict wrote:
>> The current help of --dry-run is this:
>>> "create VM but do not execute main method"
>>> But I think it's pretty important to note that the class is also not even
>>> loaded.
>> The main class should be loaded. The original intention was that it do
>> everything except invoke the main method.
>> -Alan

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list