right, so the current extra precise method is still available right?
but if you right a module that doesn't do precise contributions, then
anyone importing that module will never be able to create a different
service with the same type.. right?
anyhow.. nice idea to clean up stuff, just realize that there is cost to
having the code be too smart.. :)
Igor Drobiazko wrote:
Providing a type of the service makes you to avoid DRY. You don't have to
repeat the service id again.
So, in case of several implementations of a service interface you should use
the naming convention and provide extra contribute method for each
implementation.
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 10:04 PM, Fernando Padilla <[email protected]>wrote:
So the Contribute would support either a class or an arbitrary service
name? (for when there are two services who implement the same interface,
etc)
Igor Drobiazko wrote:
The value attribute of the annotation is used to determine the service to
contribute into. The type of the configuration does not provide enough
information for it. See an example below:
@Contribute(Runnable.class)
public static void bar(MappedConfiguration<String,String>
configuration)
{
}
@Contribute(SomeAnotherService.class)
public static void foo(MappedConfiguration<String,String>
configuration)
{
}
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 9:53 PM, Fernando Padilla <[email protected]>
wrote:
but what if I want to have two different services that are configured
using
the same typed configuration??
the name and the type of the configuration are both important.
Igor Drobiazko (JIRA) wrote:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-69?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Igor Drobiazko reassigned TAP5-69:
----------------------------------
Assignee: Igor Drobiazko
Allow service configurators to be arbitrary named and determine sevice
by
the configuration parameter
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: TAP5-69
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-69
Project: Tapestry 5
Issue Type: Improvement
Affects Versions: 5.0.15
Reporter: Kalin Krustev
Assignee: Igor Drobiazko
Tapestry used to require this naming convention for configuring
services:
public static Foo buildFoo(...) {...}
public static void contrubuteFoo(...) {...}
Then it allowed the first convention to be simplified as:
public static Foo build(...) {...}
It would be nice for the "contribute..." methods to allow also simpler
naming and use the type of the "configuration" parameter to determine
the
configured service, which will also have the same type of parameter.
For example:
in Tapestry 5.0.5 TapestryModule.java:
public ServletApplicationInitializer build(...,
List<ServletApplicationInitializerFilter> configuration, ... )
in my AppModule.java Tapestry 5.0.5 requires this naming:
public void
contributeServletApplicationInitializer(OrderedConfiguration<ServletApplicationInitializerFilter>
configuration)
Perhaps it could be simplified as:
public void
contribute(OrderedConfiguration<ServletApplicationInitializerFilter>
configuration)
If it will not be simplified, it would be nice to make the
documentation
about Tapestry IoC Configurations more clear that
the naming of the contribute methods is important, not the type of
configuration parameter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
