+1 Thanks, Eduard
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 1:19 PM, Marius Dumitru Florea < [email protected]> wrote: > +1 > > Thanks, > Marius > > On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Thomas Mortagne > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi devs, > > > > I recently modified component manager internals and changed the role > > used as key in the map from Class to Type so that it properly make a > > difference between Provider<Toto> and Provider<Titi> without the need > > to generate a special hint. > > > > For the one not aware of what Type is lets say it's what Class is > > extending. Among other things Type is also extended by > > ParameterizedType which is interesting here because it basically > > contain a Class with it's generic parameters (it also indicate if the > > type in included in another one but we don't care in our case ;)). > > > > To summarize: > > * Provider is a Class > > * Provider<String> is ParameterizedType > > and both are Type > > > > That said I would like to change the whole ComponentManager and > > related descriptors APIs to use Type as role instead of Class. > > > > = What it bring > > > > What it means is that it makes possible to cleanly represent a > > Provider in which the generic type is meaningful right in the > > ComponentDescriptor (right now the generic type is extract from the > > implementation class when the provider is registered which is pretty > > crappy) and simplify a lot the current implementation. > > > > But it also mean we could use this new "feature" for other components. > > For example right now we have things like: > > > > @Component > > public class DefaultStringDocumentReferenceResolver implements > > DocumentReferenceResolver<String> > > > > and > > > > @Component > > @Named("default/reference") > > public class DefaultReferenceDocumentReferenceResolver implements > > DocumentReferenceResolver<EntityReference> > > > > and injected by > > > > @Inject > > DocumentReferenceResolver<String> resolver; > > > > and > > > > @Inject > > @Named("default/reference") > > DocumentReferenceResolver<EntityReference> resolver; > > > > Having Type used as role means that we could have: > > > > @Inject > > DocumentReferenceResolver<String> resolver; > > > > and > > > > @Inject > > DocumentReferenceResolver<EntityReference> resolver; > > > > = What it breaks > > > > So what's the catch ? > > > > Basically it would break any code that currently programmatically > > register or unregister Provider since It would remove the current hack > > to discover the Provider parameter (assuming that the > > ComponentDescriptor now provide the complete role). But that's OK IMO > > given that Provider support is very recent and I doubt it's a common > > use case. > > > > We would obviously keep and deprecate all the existing APIs based on > > Class which are pretty easy to implement since Class extends Type. > > Even if removing them would not cause any issue when you build it's > > not binary compatible since it's not the same method signature. > > > > So WDYT ? > > > > Here is my +1 and since we are starting a new major version it sounds > > a good occasion so introduce such change. > > > > -- > > Thomas Mortagne > > _______________________________________________ > > devs mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
