5 ms·

Despite all the flaws of Java such as verbosity and heavy JVM, Java has been rock-solid and working very well. Reaching consensus might be slow, but it also ens

Despite all the flaws of Java such as verbosity and heavy JVM, Java has been rock-solid and working very well. Reaching consensus might be slow, but it also ensures the stability and reliability of Java. I have used so much buggy software that is pushed out before it is ready. Java is not one of them.

bluejekyll 9y ago
Sure. But the longer jigsaw is delayed, the longer we have to wait for a viable native option. osgi is the only alternative when this is required, but the tooling and JDK integration aren't great. There are many large applications that can benefit from jigsaw; this is sad.
- needusername 9y ago
  I find Eclipse PDE to be stellar when it comes to OSGi development. Only the services tooling is a bit lacking. I do not understand what you mean with JDK integration of OSGi isn't great.
  - bluejekyll 9y ago
    My biggest complaint is that javac is unaware of the claspath restrictions. I made an attempt at writing a custom compiler extension on top of the javac API, but gave up, do to various issues. One really annoying one; integration with maven was a pain, not the JDKs fault, but still... There are other issues with many of the tools.
    - needusername 9y ago
      > My biggest complaint is that javac is unaware of the claspath restrictions. Do you mean that when you compile with javac you see non-exported packages? > integration with maven was a pain Were you using Tycho? Were you running in "manifest first" mode and were the issues related to resolving bundles? > There are other issues with many of the tools. Can you be more specific?
      - bluejekyll 9y ago
        It's been a while. I can't be much more specific. I remember I had a lot of trouble with tycho, so I gave up on that. I used the BND tool for generating all module manifests. In the end after successfully using OSGi for distribution, and guaranteeing module separation in a 250kloc project I led, I've decided that separate api and impl modules managed by maven are good enough, with lints to guard against Class.forName() shananegans. My point is: I personally worked really hard to make OSGi work, it was not fun, I'm sure I was doing something out of the norm, and I'm not a Java novice. So having something baked into the language and jdk would make this experience better. (I am not advocating for Jigsaw over OSGi, btw, just native language and tool support for a modularity).
        needusername 9y ago
        > In the end after successfully using OSGi for distribution, and guaranteeing module separation in a 250kloc project I led, I've decided that separate api and impl modules managed by maven are good enough, with lints to guard against Class.forName() shananegans. For a single application / project that is most often the case in my experience.
- mindcrime 9y ago
  There are many large applications that can benefit from jigsaw What is it you need from Jigsaw that OSGI doesn't already provide? Personally I'm ambivalent about Jigsaw. My main hope is that they don't f%!# up and create something that breaks existing OSGI implementations. As long as I can just ignore the new stuff and keep using my existing OSGI bundles - until such a time as I'm ready to embrace the Jigsaw stuff - then I'm not going to worry about this too much. But if they break OSGI with Java 9, I'm going to be incredibly pissed.
  - pjmlp 9y ago
    > What is it you need from Jigsaw that OSGI doesn't already provide? Simplicity, native language integration and a sane path for a Java linker.
  - bluejekyll 9y ago
    Read my thread with needusername. That pretty much sums it up.
  - needusername 9y ago
    > and create something that breaks existing OSGI implementations No, they won't. Eclipse runs fine on Java 9 and AFAIK there's even limited interoperability.
jeremyjh 9y ago
This looks more like a reaction from threatened incumbents than a genuine effort to reach consensus in everyone's best interest. https://blog.plan99.net/is-jigsaw-good-or-is-it-wack-ec634d36dd6f https://blog.plan99.net/is-jigsaw-good-or-is-it-wack-ec634d3...
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
andersonk 9y ago
>Despite all the flaws of Java such as verbosity Do you mean readability?

bluejekyll 9y ago

Sure. But the longer jigsaw is delayed, the longer we have to wait for a viable native option. osgi is the only alternative when this is required, but the tooling and JDK integration aren't great. There are many large applications that can benefit from jigsaw; this is sad.

needusername 9y ago
I find Eclipse PDE to be stellar when it comes to OSGi development. Only the services tooling is a bit lacking. I do not understand what you mean with JDK integration of OSGi isn't great.
- bluejekyll 9y ago
  My biggest complaint is that javac is unaware of the claspath restrictions. I made an attempt at writing a custom compiler extension on top of the javac API, but gave up, do to various issues. One really annoying one; integration with maven was a pain, not the JDKs fault, but still... There are other issues with many of the tools.
  - needusername 9y ago
    > My biggest complaint is that javac is unaware of the claspath restrictions. Do you mean that when you compile with javac you see non-exported packages? > integration with maven was a pain Were you using Tycho? Were you running in "manifest first" mode and were the issues related to resolving bundles? > There are other issues with many of the tools. Can you be more specific?
    - bluejekyll 9y ago
      It's been a while. I can't be much more specific. I remember I had a lot of trouble with tycho, so I gave up on that. I used the BND tool for generating all module manifests. In the end after successfully using OSGi for distribution, and guaranteeing module separation in a 250kloc project I led, I've decided that separate api and impl modules managed by maven are good enough, with lints to guard against Class.forName() shananegans. My point is: I personally worked really hard to make OSGi work, it was not fun, I'm sure I was doing something out of the norm, and I'm not a Java novice. So having something baked into the language and jdk would make this experience better. (I am not advocating for Jigsaw over OSGi, btw, just native language and tool support for a modularity).
      - needusername 9y ago
        > In the end after successfully using OSGi for distribution, and guaranteeing module separation in a 250kloc project I led, I've decided that separate api and impl modules managed by maven are good enough, with lints to guard against Class.forName() shananegans. For a single application / project that is most often the case in my experience.
mindcrime 9y ago
There are many large applications that can benefit from jigsaw What is it you need from Jigsaw that OSGI doesn't already provide? Personally I'm ambivalent about Jigsaw. My main hope is that they don't f%!# up and create something that breaks existing OSGI implementations. As long as I can just ignore the new stuff and keep using my existing OSGI bundles - until such a time as I'm ready to embrace the Jigsaw stuff - then I'm not going to worry about this too much. But if they break OSGI with Java 9, I'm going to be incredibly pissed.
- pjmlp 9y ago
  > What is it you need from Jigsaw that OSGI doesn't already provide? Simplicity, native language integration and a sane path for a Java linker.
- bluejekyll 9y ago
  Read my thread with needusername. That pretty much sums it up.
- needusername 9y ago
  > and create something that breaks existing OSGI implementations No, they won't. Eclipse runs fine on Java 9 and AFAIK there's even limited interoperability.

jeremyjh 9y ago

This looks more like a reaction from threatened incumbents than a genuine effort to reach consensus in everyone's best interest. https://blog.plan99.net/is-jigsaw-good-or-is-it-wack-ec634d36dd6f https://blog.plan99.net/is-jigsaw-good-or-is-it-wack-ec634d3...

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

andersonk 9y ago

>Despite all the flaws of Java such as verbosity Do you mean readability?