On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 2:18 AM, Simon Laws <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Luciano > > it becomes somewhat difficult to >> plug new wireFormat/operationSelector types, as the binding >> implementation need to somewhat know ahead of time which interceptor >> to add. Also, checking the current implementation for Binding.JMS, >> this seems to not be a problem, as all the possible >> wireFormat/operationSelector types are all defined/implemented inside >> the JMS Binding modules. > > The binding should know that it is going to have wire format > interceptors and operation selector interceptors but it shouldn't care > what particular types are in use. The binding wire configuration is > delegated to the binding itself (rather than being constructed > completely generically) as there is value in being able to create very > binding specific interceptors between which the wire format > interceptor and operation selector interceptor slot. Hence the binding > implementation is in charge of constructing the binding wire. Do you > have some code checked in that shows the problem you are having? >
I have managed to put the extension code I wanted inside the "configureBindingChain" method and accomplish somewhat the same result. For now it should be ok, but this might be a good candidate for refactoring to the runtime. -- Luciano Resende http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://lresende.blogspot.com/
