Reusing module name token `*` in -d
nipa at codefx.org
Wed Jan 25 08:20:58 UTC 2017
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
thanks for considering this.
> If nothing else, it would require all the module-specific output
> directories to be created ahead of time, so that javac can
> determine which ones to use
Why would that be the case? It is not necessary to create them now so
why would using asterisk change that?
> It has always been the case that a single compilation for
> different packages from different libraries would result in the
> classes being placed in a single output directory hierarchy, and
> that the classes could then be selectively packaged into different
> files like .jar files.
It has also always been the case that the compiler had no notion of
projects/artifacts/modules but just of plain source files. ;) That
changed, too, so why not do the same for class files?
> If you're compiling modules together, why could you not do
> something similar?
I have no particular use case (except writing some demos) but I would
guess that it would make it more comfortable for existing tools to
move towards multi-module compilation.
I also like this idea for its symmetry. You can define input the
compilers input, sorted by modules, with *, so why not do the same for
its output? Conceptually that should be obvious (which does not mean
that there are not plenty if reasons against it).
so long ... Nicolai
On 23.01.2017 20:51, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> I don't think this proposal is a good way to go. If nothing else,
> it would require all the module-specific output directories to be
> created ahead of time, so that javac can determine which ones to
> use, which would require additional setup commands to be executed
> after a "make clean" or its equivalent in other build systems.
> Also, I note that the output directory is typically never the
> final location for the compiled classes; it is typically just a
> "staging area". It has always been the case that a single
> compilation for different packages from different libraries would
> result in the classes being placed in a single output directory
> hierarchy, and that the classes could then be selectively packaged
> into different files like .jar files. If you're compiling modules
> together, why could you not do something similar?
> -- Jon
> On 01/21/2017 02:00 AM, Nicolai Parlog wrote:
>> Another feature request from the trenches regarding multi-module
>> compilation. (It is possible that there was a similar thread a
>> couple of days/weeks (?) back but I didn't find it.)
>> It would be nice to have the ability to specify module specific
>> target folders, so they do not automatically end up in
>> It seems obvious (which could very well make it stupid) to reuse
>> the asterisk here and allow something like
>> javac --module-path mods --module-source-path
>> "./*/src/main/java" -d "./*/target/classes" -module
>> I have not thought through how this might or might not work with
>> multiple module source paths. It looks like the only tractable
>> approach would be to not allow more than one -d element.
>> so long ... Nicolai
a blog about software development
high-quality Java/JVM content
Free and Open Source Software for the City of Dortmund
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the jigsaw-dev