On Mon Dec 29 2014 at 8:06:07 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> wrote:
> provided impl can have a hardcoded priority so not an issue (finally > @Priority value is stored in a map or any data structure and never > used directly so we can directly do it for internal impls) > Right, but then if I have two instances of (say BasicPropertyProviderImpl) that look at two different files, they'll end up with the same priority. I just don't think the priority annotation works well here. > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau > http://www.tomitribe.com > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com > https://github.com/rmannibucau > > > 2014-12-29 13:40 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <[email protected]>: > > It depends, whether you need an extra annotation in that case. > > Sometimes a good old numeric priority could also do. > > > > Werner > > > > On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 1:34 PM, John D. Ament <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> On Sun Dec 28 2014 at 7:06:22 PM Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> > Hi! > >> > > >> > Anatole and I are currently discussing whether it is worth it adding > >> > @Priority or not. > >> > > >> > >> Depends on what issue you're trying to solve. If it's to assign > priority > >> to a config source, it probably wouldn't work since some of the impls > are > >> provided by tamaya. > >> > >> > >> > > >> > It would make a few interfaces more elegant but this also has one > >> > downside. This version of JSR-250 is not yet in JavaSE by default. Of > >> > course it is needed for all JavaEE7++ servers. > >> > > >> > The question now is whether we can burden our users to add > >> > commons-annotation-1.2 in SE? > >> > > >> > LieGrue, > >> > strub > >> > > >> >
