On Mon, 23 Jan 2023 07:56:08 GMT, Per Minborg <pminb...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/util/access/ByteArrayAccess.java >> line 26: >> >>> 24: */ >>> 25: >>> 26: package jdk.internal.util.access; >> >> This is pretty deep; I'd drop the final "access". The package name >> `jdk.internal.util` is fine. > > Happy to rename to `ByteArray` if we keep the package. The reason for > proposing a separate package is that if we later decide to export the class, > we are able to `export to` only this package and not all the other classes in > `jdk.internal.util'. This could reduce coupling. "access" in the package/class name does look a bit strange, and could easily get mixed up with the package and classes that are used for shared secrets. I don't think jdk.internal.util.ByteArrays would look out of place. Hopefully it won't need to be exported to many other modules as we need to keep the qualified exports to a minimum. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/12076
