Yeah, it's been briefly mentioned in this thread:
http://markmail.org/message/xyyixpaolg45cj4x
The spec jar is just 4K. The annotations that I used are compatible
with it, so if during development we decide it makes sense to stay
standard-compliant in this case, it won't be a problem to switch.
(BTW, SVN is back up and I checked in the remaining provider code).
Andrus
On Nov 16, 2009, at 8:54 AM, Andrey Razumovsky wrote:
Hi,
I'm not sure it will be helpful, but there's JSR-330 spec for that
(instead
of borrowing straightly from Guice):
http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/final/jsr330/index.html
It defines several useful classes and annotations, as @Inject and
Provider<T>
2009/11/16 Andrus Adamchik <[email protected]>
Just for kicks wrote a simple DI container for Cayenne. I checked
it in
partially to sanbdox folder until the ASF SVN repo went down (
http://monitoring.apache.org/), so I'll commit the rest on Monday, or
whenever SVN becomes available.
This no-frills DI container took me only a couple of hours to write
(it
borrows some Guice API, but implementation is all mine). It supports
* annotation-based field dependency injection
* binding interfaces to implementation classes via fluent API
* binding interfaces to "provider" (same as "factory") classes
* merging multiple DI "modules".
The whole thing is only 14K after compilation (so it beats all full
featured DI containers in size). Of course that's because it
doesn't have
all the fancy stuff (of which we'll add at least a few more things)
such as
constructor injection, dependency cycle resolving, dynamic interface
proxies, bound object lifecycle, integration with Spring, etc.
Since we are
not planning a general purpose container, we might survive without
most of
those.
Here is how the current Configuration class might look like when it
is
based on DI:
public class Configuration {
private Injector injector;
public Configuration() {
this(new CayenneModule());
}
public Configuration(Module... modules) {
this.injector = DIBootstrap.createInjector(modules);
}
public DataChannel getDataChannel() {
return injector.getInstance(DataChannel.class);
}
public ObjectContext getNewContext() {
return injector.getInstance(ObjectContext.class);
}
// we may create getters for other "services" if we need to
}
And the actual configuration class (aka "module") used above:
public class CayenneModule implements Module {
public void configure(Binder binder) {
binder.bind(EventManager.class).to(EventManagerImpl.class);
binder.bind(DataChannel.class).to(DataDomain.class);
binder.bind(QueryCache.class).toProvider(LRUCacheFactory.class);
binder.bind(QueryLogger.class).toProvider(FancyLogger.class);
// an so on...
}
}
"CayenneModule" is what users can override (e.g. simply subclass),
providing alternative implementations for some services.
The next step in this prototype would be an attempt to define the
current
Cayenne stack in terms of DI.
Andrus
On Oct 27, 2009, at 11:01 PM, Kevin Menard wrote:
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Andrus Adamchik <[email protected]
>
wrote:
And I just discovered that both Spring (3.0RC1) and Juice (trunk)
support
the annotations from this JSR. So it could make sense for us to
use these
annotations internally as well. Couldn't dig any info on the
Tapestry IoC
support for this JSR, but they are on the JSR "support group", so
at
least
they are watching it.
Thiago, the Tapestry member on the support group, just learned
that it
had been approved. Howard didn't even know the JSR existed.
There's
no discussion on adding in the annotation support to Tapestry IoC
and
I suspect it will happen, but Tapestry is behind the ball on that
one.
--
Kevin
--
Andrey
