4 ms·
Well new JVM rules comes with new JVM. So something gotta give. Leaving Java be potentially unsafe just because few customer relied on it would be irresponsible
by geodel 4y ago
Well new JVM rules comes with new JVM. So something gotta give. Leaving Java be potentially unsafe just because few customer relied on it would be irresponsible behavior on JDK maintainers part.
- exabrial 4y agoI'm not sure how current JVMs are "unsafe" though. If you go messing with the internals of third party classes, seems like any consequences should be obvious.
- kaba0 4y agoThen just enable it at start time with a flag.
- tsimionescu 4y ago> If you go messing with the internals of third party classes, seems like any consequences should be obvious. The point made in the article is that it's often third-party libraries that do this, breaking invariants in your code. And, with older JVMs, it won't be immediately obvious to you as a user of that library that this is happening.
- exabrial 4y agoI can't recall a time when 3rd party code has changed something in my code and broke it. I was hoping someone could provide me with an example
- tsimionescu 4y agoTry loading a library that uses com.sun.* through reflection in a program running on JVM 9 or higher with default settings and you'll see an example. Maybe it hasn't happened to code that you personally wrote, but it has certainly happened this way to code that someone at OpenJDK wrote.
- kaba0 4y agoBut that third party code may depend on some JVM internal through unsafe, which latter might change (and one really should not depend on internals) and break your code.