Campbell Ritchie wrote:Congratulations What is wrong with 65%? That sounds a good score.
Antonio Berr wrote:
Because for the same reason, also this answer is not correct:
In bottom-up migration all modules are moved to module-path.
Jan Paul Brasser wrote:I think this is confusing too, as I the endgoal of a migration can ever be an incomplete migration. No matter how I look at the Enthuware answer, it does not make sense from any perspective.
Stephan van Hulst wrote:
Wouldn't it be strange if I could become a licensed dentist just by studying for an exam and never doing any practice? Why do people think the same doesn't apply to programming?
The Java Virtual Machine starts execution by invoking the method main of some specified class or interface, passing it a single argument which is an array of strings.
Simon Roberts wrote:
Paul Anilprem wrote:
Anil Philip wrote:
If, as Stefan said, you can have both -p and -cp together, then can code in the module moduleName access the non-modularized jars in jarFolderName ?
Yes, but only if it is an automatic module.
Except that the example here asks about "modularized jars in jarFolderName" -- and jarFolderName is on the classpath, *not* the module path, so they're not going to be automatic modules, and the above will not work.
Stephan van Hulst wrote:you only need to take two minutes to write a module descriptor to give your module a name and list its dependencies on other modules.
Anil Philip wrote:
But why not? if you left out the -p then wouldn't it regress to the old-style prehistoric invocation using classpath?
1) When you have module options in the command line, the program runs as a modular