Is not yet specified package and utils

[lausdahl]

Would it be possible to change the Delegate loading from using no package to a package like org.overture.lib or search default first and then this package?

There are some utility methods like stringOf(Value val) that I keep repeating in different places because I cannot refer IO since it has no package.

The method is also not exposed but thats not a problem to fix if the class just had a package.

I think that leaving these classes without a package isn't the best approach in the first place and I dont think that we would change any backwards compatibility if we just search both for a match.

[nickbattle]

Yes, I like that idea. We would really need to run it past the Language Board, but it is a sensible addition rather than a change.

[peterwvj]

@nickbattle why do we need to run it past the LB? The way I understand this, it's just an internal change in the Delegate class, isn't it?

[nickbattle]

Well yes, but if we want all future native libs to be in a particular Java package structure, that would have to be added to the packaging guidelines?

[peterwvj]

Ah yes, I see.

[peterwvj]

Okay so it is implemented. Can we close this issue, or do we need to add something on the Language Board library submission workflow page?

[nickbattle]

Or perhaps update the LRM or guides, if they talk about the package structure for native library loading?

[peterwvj]

I can't find anything in the LRM, but there's a related section in the Overture user manual: 16.2 Defining Your Own Java Libraries to be used from Overture. This section describes the naming convention used for packages (>>The Java delegate, if present, has the same name as the VDM module/class name with underscores ("_") replaced with package naming dots (".").<<. We could add an extra paragraph in this section that describes the new loading strategy.

What do you think?

[nickbattle]

This needs raising with the LB (next year!).