JEP 335: Deprecate the Nashorn JavaScript Engine
Can someone give some background on the reasoning?<p>I&#x27;m glad it&#x27;s not completely Oracle&#x27;s call. I see this as a power move. Nashorn is part of OpenJDK, which is becoming less and less Oracle-specific. Graal&#x2F;Truffle however are squarely under Oracle&#x27;s umbrella.<p>&gt; With the rapid pace at which ECMAScript language constructs, along with APIs, are adapted and modified, we have found Nashorn challenging to maintain. [...] GraalJS using Oracle Labs&#x27; Truffle technology may soon be publicly available as a Java module. It is understood that GraalJS provides most of the same functionality as Nashorn along with better performance.<p>So, one is too challenging to maintain but the other isn&#x27;t? Why don&#x27;t you just come out and say it? You are shifting resources to your more proprietary impl that you have a premium version of. And if no other OpenJDK maintainers want to step up and maintain Nashorn, I say remove it. But everyone should be clear about Oracle&#x27;s motives here. I expect we&#x27;ll start seeing this more and more like we do with mission control...Oracle is going to dedicate fewer and fewer resources to OpenJDK, the Oracle version of which no longer carries reasonable benefits on its own. More ancillary products around the JVM will be focused on. Makes sense, but I sure wish an alternative Oracle-effort-sized OpenJDK maintainer existed.<p>And for those of you that have used Nashorn and need it to do work, remember what is happening here. And those of you starting the same thing with Graal&#x2F;Truffle, watch what is happening here. Lots of us work w&#x2F; the core of the JDK, but beware of building new products on Oracle tech.