Sorry Maurizio, It's not your understanding that is lacking, it is mine. I did not get the news.
Mea culpa for not understanding the current situation properly. Thanks, Eirik On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 2:41 PM Maurizio Cimadamore < maurizio.cimadam...@oracle.com> wrote: > Hi, > not sure I understand your question correctly. > > But if you are referring to the fact that jextract should *not* be part > of the JDK, please note that the FFM API does _not_ include jextract. > The jextract tool is instead made available in a standalone repository: > > https://github.com/openjdk/jextract > > For which binary snapshots are also provided here: > > https://jdk.java.net/jextract/ > > (this change happened roughly an year ago [1]). > > Cheers > Maurizio > > [1] - https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/panama-dev/2022-March/016632.html > > > On 25/03/2023 18:05, Eirik Bjørsnøs wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'll raise this periodic (?) question for discussion, but first I want > > to make it clear I have no opinion myself. > > > > Here is the question in question: > > > > Should jextract be extracted from the JDK? If so, would it make sense > > to do it now rather than later? > > > > I'm asking this because I remember this being presented as an open > > question early in the introduction of project Panama. As time has > > passed by, maybe we have learned something which could influence this > > discussion? > > > > There seems to be an increasing number of questions and concerns > > related to jextract in OpenJDK, perhaps containing them in a separate > > release cycle would do good? > > > > Thanks, > > Eirik. >
