Logo Questions Linux Laravel Mysql Ubuntu Git Menu
 

What is the difference between using javac and javax.tools.JavaCompiler?

Maven Compiler Plugin documentation states:

The Compiler Plugin is used to compile the sources of your project. Since 3.0, the default compiler is javax.tools.JavaCompiler (if you are using java 1.6) and is used to compile Java sources. If you want to force the plugin using javac, you must configure the plugin option forceJavacCompilerUse

And indeed when forceJavacCompilerUse is not specified in our build there are some build errors, for example when the code references the com.sun. packages (legacy, we know that its a bad idea...)

What are other differences between these two compile modes in general and with maven? Are there any output differences that one should know?

like image 480
Vic Avatar asked Nov 26 '13 12:11

Vic


People also ask

What is the difference between javac and Java?

The javac command is used to compile Java programs, it takes . java file as input and produces bytecode. Following is the syntax of this command. The java command is used to execute the bytecode of java.

What is javac tool?

The javac tool reads class and interface definitions, written in the Java programming language, and compiles them into bytecode class files. It can also process annotations in Java source files and classes.

What is the difference between javac EXE and Java EXE?

It's a bit of a simplification, but mostly yes. java.exe is how you start the JVM. javac.exe is how you start the compiler. The actual implementation of the JVM and compiler doesn't lie within those particular files (only), however.

Is javac a JVM?

No, javac isn't part of the JVM itself.


1 Answers

javac (as "java compiler") is an executable, which could be theoretically even a platform-dependent executable or a script. This is called to compile a .java to a .class.

On windows is its name javac.exe, and it is normally somewhere below C:\Program Files*\jdk*\bin.

This compiler was developed in java as well. That means, if we start this .exe, a new java virtual machine need to be started to run it. This is slow.

But, because it was written in Java, there is a much faster alternative to it: from our already running jvm, we simply import its main class (f.e. javax.tools.JavaCompiler or such) and call this. This doesn't need to start an unneeded jvm. That is what maven does. Simply 10 yrs was them enough to make this correctly. :-)

Of course it has some fallbacks as well. To most probable cause is that in the case of the internal compiler it needs to run from the same jvm and in the same namespace as the maven core. Also specifying an alternate jvm is impossible, and there could be some side effects as well resulting from the namespace collisions. But they are very improbable, because both of them is well-designed software.

like image 122
peterh Avatar answered Sep 21 '22 14:09

peterh