groovy-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jorge Franco <grooscr...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: challenges through Java modules (aka jigsaw)
Date Thu, 26 Nov 2015 22:57:45 GMT
Hello! Sorry I'm not a groovy developer, yet!

I think path 3 is the way to go. I want to see groovy on devices, IoT's,
lambda's, containers,... I'm sure is a lot of work, but if we want to go
together with java, we have to do that effort. I feel dirty when a lambda
doesn't compile. I'll help, and sure more people will do the same. Just
define the changes, assign mentors for each big change and let's do this!

Groovy 10 more years please :)

2015-11-26 22:45 GMT+01:00 Jesper Steen Møller <jesper@selskabet.org>:

> Hi list
>
> If it’s primarily a question of moving files in modules out into distinct
> package names, how about doing the following:
> 1) Move to a Jigsaw-compatible module split going forward, thus breaking
> compatibility for Jigsaw adopters, and
> 2) Provide a “compatibility” overlay jar containing all the classes with
> old package names for non-jigsaw users?
>
> That way, only people targetting Jigsaw-enabled runtimes will be hit by
> the source imcompatibility.
>
> -Jesper
>
> > On 26. nov. 2015, at 21.29, Jochen Theodorou <blackdrag@gmx.org> wrote:
> >
> > On 26.11.2015 21:05, Guillaume Laforge wrote:
> >> I'm also thinking it's the right moment to "fix" things we've done
> >> wrong, have a clean separation, not leaking implementation, etc.
> >> That's feeling like the right moment to seize this opportunity. We
> >> wouldn't keep the odd location of some of the classes we've already
> >> mentioned. And as Cédric says, we could also offer a converter in a way
> >> or another to help the migration.
> >> People fear transitions like Python 2 to 3 would happen as soon as we
> >> break compatibility, but the differences between Python 2 and 3 were
> >> much bigger that what we're speaking about here.
> >
> > I think we need a list of the specific cases, then we can talk about the
> seize of the impact.
> >
> > You two know I was all for a big change (MOP2). I am worried about the
> manpower to actually do that change. I was back then already actually and
> did not want to do it all alone.
> >
> > If a source converter can be done the barrier sure is smaller. On the
> other hand Python had https://docs.python.org/2/library/2to3.html
> >
> > bye blackdrag
>
>

Mime
View raw message