I mean the root-container-class. What if it's not instantiatable?
On 11/7/06, Achim Hügen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
James Carman schrieb: > What if the complex type isn't instantiatable? What if the only way > to instantiate it is via a factory method? What do you mean with 'not instantiatable'? Why? The getFactoryConfig() can call a service or whatever you can think of to create an instance of the container. Achim > > > On 11/7/06, Apache Wiki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Dear Wiki user, >> >> You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on >> "Jakarta-hivemind Wiki" for change notification. >> >> The following page has been changed by AchimHuegen: >> http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta-hivemind/NewAndNoteworthyFeaturesInAnnotationBranch >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> The container object is passed around to the different >> contributions which can add new >> data to it. >> >> - Example for a map based configuration: >> + Example of a map based configuration: >> {{{ >> @Configuration(id = "FactoryConfig") >> public Map getFactoryConfig() >> @@ -153, +153 @@ >> >> container.put("map", "java.util.HashMap"); >> container.put("collection", "java.util.ArrayList"); >> container.put("inputStream", "java.io.ByteArrayInputStream"); >> + } >> + }}} >> + >> + Example of a complex configuration object: >> + {{{ >> + @Configuration(id = "strutsModule") >> + public ModuleConfig getStrutsModule() >> + { >> + return new ModuleConfigImpl(); >> + } >> + >> + @Contribution(configuration-id = "strutsModule") >> + public void contributeToStrutsModule(ModuleConfig config) >> + { >> + config.addActionConfig(new ActionConfig()); >> + config.addFormBeanConfig(new MyFormBeanConfig()); >> } >> }}} >> >> @@ -192, +208 @@ >> >> It's mainly used to retain backward compatibility. Certain >> configurations are defined >> in the core framework now which knows nothing about schemas. >> >> - >> - >> > >
