[MJLINK-27] Code incorrectly assumes that two modules won't have the same name

• Type: Bug
• Status: Closed
• Priority: Major
• Resolution: Not A Problem
• Affects Version/s: 3.0.0
• Assignee: Robert Scholte
• Reporter: Gili
• Created: 11/Sep/18 01:50
• Updated: 11/Nov/20 21:37
• Resolved: 07/Dec/18 16:15

Description

Karl Heinz Marbaise closed MJLINK-7 referencing a Stackoverflow post to prove that module names must be unique. In fact, this Stackoverflow post says the exact opposite. The bottom half of the post states that modules in separate directories *are* allowed to have the same name. The bottom of the post concludes:

That makes it possible to have the same module in different directories.

It doesn't have to be the same module per-se. It is possible for two different implementations with the same module name to reside on the module path, so long as the modules reside in different directory. This is useful for "class shadowing". In my particular case, I ship a no-op implementation of a module by default but users can insert a working implementation in front of the module path to enable the feature.

Please reopen this issue or continue its work here.

Issue Links

• relates to: MJLINK-28 Add WARNING in case of duplicate module names