Yes, it would still default to singleton, just as it does now. Yes, *Impl in the same package might even be the first place it looks. Then look for an *Impl in the impl subpackage. I normally use the latter setup, but many folks do just put the implementation classes in the same package as their interface. I'd like to make HiveMind very simple to configure with minimal effort. That's why we offer the option to use "convention over configuration."
-----Original Message----- From: Knut Wannheden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 5:36 AM To: dev@hivemind.apache.org Subject: Re: New convention? James, That sounds like a useful shorthand notation. I suppose the service model would also just default to "singleton". HiveMind could also check for an *Impl class in the same package. And for services where the interface is a class then it's of course even simpler... --knut On 7/30/06, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > All, > > How about this? You can define a service point with nothing but the > interface! Consider this example: > > <service interface="com.myco.service.MyService" /> > > First, HiveMind will default the service point id to "MyService." Then, > HiveMind will look for a default implementation class called > "com.myco.service.impl.MyServiceImpl" and try to use BuilderFactory to build > a default, autowired instance. I've found that this is my typical scenario. > This way, you can cut out a LOT of XML. What do you think? > > James > > >
