Tapestry Inversion of Control ContainerPage edited by Howard M. Lewis ShipChanges (3)
Full ContentTapestry Inversion of Control ContainerWhy do I need to define an interface for my services? Why can't I just use the class itself?First of all: you can do exactly this, but you lose some of the functionality that Tapestry's IoC container provides. The reason for the split is so that Tapestry can provide functionality for your service around the core service implementation. It does this by creating proxies: Java classes One of the primary purposes for proxies is to encapsulate the service's lifecycle: most services are singletons that are created just in time. Just in time means only as soon If you binding a service class (not a service interface and class), then the service is fully instantiated the first time it is injected, rather than at that first method invocation. Further, you The final reason for the service interface / implementation split is to nudge you towards always coding to an interface, which has manifest benefits for code structure, robustness, and testability.
Change Notification Preferences
View Online
|
View Changes
|
- [CONF] Apache Tapestry > Tapestry Inversion of Control Conta... confluence
- [CONF] Apache Tapestry > Tapestry Inversion of Control ... confluence
- [CONF] Apache Tapestry > Tapestry Inversion of Control ... confluence
- [CONF] Apache Tapestry > Tapestry Inversion of Control ... confluence
- [CONF] Apache Tapestry > Tapestry Inversion of Control ... confluence
- [CONF] Apache Tapestry > Tapestry Inversion of Control ... confluence
- [CONF] Apache Tapestry > Tapestry Inversion of Control ... confluence
- [CONF] Apache Tapestry > Tapestry Inversion of Control ... confluence