Mailing List Message #409
From: patrick <>
Subject: Re: [WO-DEV] Java 17? Half or Full?
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2022 22:23:23 +0000
To: WebObjects & WOnder Development <>

I am would like to propose an idea regarding this issue. My proposed idea is loosely technical, is merely meant to illustrate the idea. 

First a little about me. Some of you that know me, know that I am not a developer. I am like a musical producer that doesn’t write or play music. I understand most parts of a project but couldn’t start one on my own. I have a couple of commercial WO applications that are deployed and am actively continuing development with the help of some of you on this list. 

Fact: WO is governed by a massive license agreement and the concern is how to update the WO development without stepping over a decompiling landmine. In the old days to join the Apple Developer Program you had to sign a very strict NDA to become part of the program, and pay $500. Somewhere around 2010 Apple decided to open-source WebObjects and made betas of 5.5.x sources available for a couple months on the developer DVDs. They never continued this and instead pulled WebObjects completely. 

As a non-lawyer, I am going to make certain assumptions and draw some conclusions. Therefore take everything I say with the largest grain of salt you can find. While many parts of the Apple NDA may apply to the development pipeline, once a product is out in the public domain, not sure if the NDA remains in effect. Parts of it likely will remain in effect but certainly not all of it. Also an intellectual property in the United States can only be prosecuted for a certain number of years and after that it is free for all. Not sure about the timeline, but sure looks like Apple is running out of time. That still leaves the decompiling issue. Every company decompiles or deconstructs a competitor product and tries to figure out how to make it without violating the intellectual property protection. The difficulty is for the offended party (Apple) to be able to prove it.

All that legal stuff sounds like a big pill to swallow, is complicated and certainly expensive. What if I can show you a way where we can skip over both issues, do our updates without having to worry about the lawyers and remain faithful (legally) to Apple?

What if, upon installing WOnder an included script can run through the WO class files, it unzips the jar files, includes, excludes or replaces whatever it needs to be updated? This script will run by the individual user upon downloading and installing the WOnder framework, i.e. no distribution? This idea has a chance of working If, based on one of the earlier posts, that said that there is no need to decompile, but rather unzip. If true, then I think this idea has a good chance of working. 

What do you all think?

Best Regards,

Patrick Abuzeni, MD
Tel: 305-444-2888

The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this information in error, please contact the sender and delete the message and material from all computers.

On Dec 10, 2022, at 10:42 AM, Aaron Rosenzweig <> wrote:

This is both a topic for both pure NeXT/Apple WO as well as a WOnder.

Your WO deployments, are they on Java 17? Are they half or full Java 17? Please chime in.

In our case, at present, we are developing and deploying on a Java 17 VM but using Java 1.8 (version 8) compliance. I call this “Java 17 Half"

Java 17 Half -> Developing and deploying on Java 17 but using Java 1.8 compliance.
Java 17 Full -> Not only using a Java 17 VM but also targeting v17 compliance and using JPMS (Java Package Management System) which was introduced with Java 9.

PHB -> “So I was golfing with my buddies and found out they are all using Java 17 *sealed* classes. This is so cool and will revolutionize our codebase. I want you to start using it immediately. It was introduced with Java 17. I’m so glad we are on a 17 VM.”

Me -> “Can’t do it”

PHB -> “Why not? You told me we went to Java 17 over a year ago.”

Me -> “We did and are on Java 17, but we compile for Java 1.8”

PHB -> “That’s no good. We need to be fully modern. We need to be able to use new constructs as they emerge. Why are we compiling for Java 1.8 ? Is it a problem with WOnder?”

Me -> “Because our core frameworks are closed source, from NeXT/Apple, our hands are somewhat tied. That’s part of the problem. The other part is that class loading changed dramatically with Java 9 onward and broke a lot of things for many people. Because we leverage so much from Apple and WOnder, we pretty much are stuck. Our frameworks are stuck in java 8 compliance and therefore so are we”

Old Class loader -> Java 1.8 (version 8) and older.
New Class loader -> Java 9 and newer.

The new class loader tries to avoid “Jar Hell” but that’s something we actually enjoyed about the old class loader. What Oracle saw as a weakness and sought to fix, Sun saw as a strength. It’s causing us trouble right now with going Java 17 Full. Here’s an example.

Consider a jar named “animals_v1.jar” that has classes for birds and other creatures. Imagine that there is also a newer “animals_v2.jar” Let me diagram them below in pseudocode:



Suppose you are using the old class loader and somehow had both jars in your class path. It matters which jar is first because the first one wins when there are multiple definitions in the class path for “com.acme.Duck”. You could have a situation where things compile but at runtime there’s a failure because we can’t ask “hasFeathers()” and it’s situations like these that Oracle considered a design flaw or “Jar Hell.”

In our case, we considered this functionality of the old class loader a strength. As long as we are careful, we can avoid the pitfalls but also do clever patching of closed source Apple frameworks like so:

Apple java frameworks:

WOnder java frameworks:

By putting WOnder’s frameworks first in the class path, and being careful to not remove needed functionality of NSArray, we can “overwrite” Apple's implementation with an improved one while letting the rest of Apple’s code work directly with our NSArray replacement. Unfortunately this breaks the new class loader. It’s not allowed. Cannot have NSArray defined in more than one named place. Even if we take WOnder out of the equation, we still have problems with Apple’s JavaXML framework where it redefines W3C and DOM objects that java.xml named module natively defines in modern Java.

If we want to compile for modern java on new VMs what can we do? I’m no expert, so correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m trying to make sense of what our options are. There is no easy path. There is no set of simple VM arguments or anything magic that takes a small amount of effort. We’d have to do something like TreasureBoat where we take ownership of the private libraries. We can’t surgically replace a few objects in the private libraries anymore by class path ordering and I don’t think Aspect-Oriented Programming nor Dependency Injection can save us here either. We also now have conflicts in pure Apple libraries with what is currently built-into Java.

How long are we ok using modern VMs but compiling for 1.8? “OK” meaning functional but not allowed to use new Java language features.

2026 is when Amazon stops supporting 1.8 JVMs
2030 is when Oracle stops supporting 1.8 JVMs

I could not determine when javac compliance level support might be dropped for Java 1.8 on modern VMs. That said, I guess it would be at least until 2030 when Oracle no longer provides 1.8 VM support. It might last longer than that… perhaps 2040. Hard to say. Lots of people are struggling with JPMS (Java Modules) in similar situations as us. Such as this quote: "Your program might even have a dep on some jar that was compiled under jdk4 and the author and source are nowhere to be found (or went out of business a decade ago)... and suddenly it breaks under java9. Things like that are largely what prevented mass adoption of jdk9 immediately.”

We might be able to be creative by taking jars from multiple frameworks, putting them in one modularized framework, and exposing something for a modern java app. I’m not clear that would work but maybe. I think there are Apple frameworks which conflict with named module java.xml which likely cannot be worked around. This guy did something like this for his legacy frameworks (not WO):

In closing, I don’t think it’s possible without rewriting closed-source Apple libraries and also rewriting WOnder to target compliance level beyond 1.8. Is there anyone building with compliance level beyond 1.8?
This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
 the mailing list <>.
To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <>
To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <>
To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <>
Send administrative queries to  <>

Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster