On Nov 3, 2007 3:58 PM, Howard Lewis Ship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've been giving this a bit of thought lately. > > It seems to me that a likely scenario is one in which an existing > library, such as tapestry-hibernate, doesn't do quite what a user > needs, but contains a lot of useful code that could be resused. > However, autoloading means that just having the JAR on the classpath > wires it up, without giving an option to use the code but not the > services. > > In addition, another common case is to forget to add a module's JAR to > the classpath, and then not understand why things are not working. > > The solution to both of these problems is to be more explicit about > bringing in modules. The approach I'm moving towards is to add a > @SubModule annotation to the application's module. With that in place, > a missing dependency is a compile time error. > > Thoughts?
Personally the first reason why I've chosen HiveMind first then T5 IoC was/is the presence of this feature. It's incredibly amazing how easy it is to switch implementations of add features, just drop the jar, so i depend on this feature plus it's a distinction from any other framework. I can see the point on "use the code without using the services" but (for me) it's not worth the change. If that is the direction T5 IoC will take i would like to suggest to make this a user choice with a default behaviour but not cut it off. -- Massimo http://meridio.blogspot.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
