[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-1510?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13022014#comment-13022014
]
Igor Drobiazko commented on TAP5-1510:
--------------------------------------
It makes absoutely sense to change the logic of matching the service iterface
to use:
markable.getServiceInterface().isAssignableFrom(serviceDef.getServiceInterface()
Regarding @Match: At the time of implementing @Advice or @Decorate annotations
it made sense to me to ignore the @Match annotation when @Advice or @Decorate
is present. For example in the following code you need to decide how to match
the service: either by its service id
@Match("Bla")
@Advice(serviceInterface=Foo.class)
public static void bla(...) { ...}
But if we change the serviceInterfac() attribute of @Advice or @Decorate
annotations to default to Object.class, then we could come up with something
like:
DefaultModuleDefImpl:
private <T extends Annotation> String[] extractPatterns(Class
serviceInterface, String id, Method method)
{
if(serviceInterface != Object.class)
return new String[]{};
Match match = method.getAnnotation(Match.class);
if (match == null)
return new String[]
{ id };
return match.value();
}
What does it mean? If you didn't provide the service interface for @Advise or
@Decorate, then you probably want to match by id. On the other hand, if you
want to match a specific service interface than, @Match should be ignored as it
doesn't make sense. The alternatives would be:
@Match("Bla")
@Advice
public static void bla(...) { ...}
@Advice(serviceInterface=Foo.class)
public static void bla(...) { ...}
Does it make sense?
> The @Advise annotation limits advice to just a specific interface type
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TAP5-1510
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-1510
> Project: Tapestry 5
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: tapestry-ioc
> Affects Versions: 5.3.0, 5.2.5
> Reporter: Howard M. Lewis Ship
>
> @Advise requires that you specify a service interface (there's no default
> value). This is much more limiting than the advise method naming prefix,
> which will match all services (subject to the use of @Match), without regard
> to service interface.
> Further, inside ModuleImpl:
> private boolean markerMatched(ServiceDef serviceDef, Markable markable)
> {
> if
> (!serviceDef.getServiceInterface().equals(markable.getServiceInterface()))
> return false;;
> here, the Markable is the AdvisorDef2 instance generated from the @Advise
> annotation. This is an exact comparison; I believe this should be:
> if (!
> markable.getServiceInterface().isAssignableFrom(serviceDef.getServiceInterface()))
> return false;
> That, combined with a default of Object.class for @Advisor.serviceInterface
> would do the trick ... the @Advise.serviceInterface acts as an umbrella over
> any services' service interface.
> ..... ok, did more research and more stepping with the debugger. The above
> should be fixed, but it's only the second case of matching, the primary match
> should be based on the @Match annotation ... but that's broken too:
> Frrom DefaultModuleDefImpl:
> private <T extends Annotation> String[] extractPatterns(T annotation,
> String id, Method method)
> {
> if(annotation != null)
> return new String[]{};
>
> Match match = method.getAnnotation(Match.class);
> if (match == null)
> return new String[]
> { id };
> return match.value();
> }
> Here, the annotation is the @Advise annotation; I don't get why it returns
> empty string array; we should still see if there's a @Match annotation.
> Looking at the code, I can't see any reason why we would return that empty
> string array, the presense of the @Advise annotation (or for a decorator
> method, the @Decorate annotation) has no purpose I can figure out.
> In my situation, my advise method was not invoked because
> a) Primary check (by service id) failed, because the @Match annotation was
> ignored
> b) Secondary check (by service type and marker annotations) failed, because
> of inexact match on service interface
> So, the end result is the @Advise is only useful to advise a specific service
> interface, which is the opposite of what method advice is about ... it's
> supposed to match against a swath of services, adapting the advise to
> whatever methods are present in those services.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
