I will wait for an answer of Brian and then file the report. Do you want me
to create a topic in the course about the adapter framework? Everything
okay in Italy? Vincenzo picking it up?

Regards,

Wim


On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 8:22 PM, Lars Vogel <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Wim,
>
> thanks. That feature would be a great and a big saver for boilerplate
> code. Maybe worth a bug report. Also you may want to consider suggesting a
> GSoC project for this feature.
>
> Best regards, Lars
>
>
> 2013/3/7 Wim Jongman <[email protected]>
>
>> Brian,
>>
>> I have found some documentation about the adapter mechanism [1]. It would
>> be nice if the injection framework could automatically adapt (if requested).
>>
>> A frequent pattern obviously is adapting an object received from the
>> active selection. Currently you can ask the specific object you are
>> interested in like so:
>>
>> @Inject
>> public void someMethod(@Optional
>> @Named(IServiceConstants.Active_Selection)  Person person)
>>
>> This has the convenience of only receiving Person objects. If the adapter
>> framework is active in this scenario then it would save even more
>> boilerplate code.
>>
>>        @Inject
>>        public void someMethod(@Optional 
>> *@Adapt*@Named(IServiceConstants.Active_Selection)
>> *Person person*)
>>
>>        <do something>
>>
>> instead of:
>>
>> @Inject
>> public void someMethod(
>>  @Optional @Named(IServiceConstants.ACTIVE_SELECTION) *Object someObject*,
>> *Adapter adapter*) {
>>
>>  Person person = adapter.adapt(someObject, Person.class);
>>                 if(person != null)
>>
>>                <do someting>
>>
>> I think it is save to say that adaption is ALWAYS required because why
>> would there be an adapter otherwise?
>>
>> [1] http://wiki.eclipse.org/E4/EAS/Adapting_Objects
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Wim Jongman
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Brian de Alwis <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> I'm using the Adapter/EclipseAdapter — no need to implement.  The
>>> default implementation (EclipseAdapter) saves a lot of boilerplate since
>>> the IAdapterManager doesn't do an IAdaptable check.  I personally can't
>>> think of anything else to add to its interface.
>>>
>>> Re: Logger: agreed.  The world doesn't need yet another logger interface.
>>>
>>> I wouldn't say IContributionFactory is ready as it doesn't have a story
>>> for extension points.
>>>
>>> Brian.
>>>
>>> On 5-Mar-2013, at 4:50 PM, John Arthorne wrote:
>>>
>>> Eric Moffatt wrote on 03/05/2013 04:13:56 PM:
>>> > Tomorrow I expect to have something on the Services; this is an area
>>> > that I'll likely need input on since I only use the EModelService
>>> > and EPartService. Tom, we're not going to declare the various
>>> > presentation / rendering API now correct ?
>>>
>>> FWIW, I scanned through the "core" services in
>>> org.eclipse.e4.core.services today. From what I can see, only IEventBroker
>>> is truly fleshed out and ready to be treated as API. Logger is probably
>>> used enough at this point that we'll need to keep it, although if I could
>>> do things over I'd pick the heavily used SLF4J Logger API for better
>>> interop with existing code. Many of the other services are used internally
>>> but I'm not sure we have proved they are valuable abstractions or just
>>> incomplete replacements for existing 3.x API. If any consumers are
>>> implementing their own IContributionFactory, Adapter, StatusReporter, or
>>> TranslationService I would be curious to know about them. If there are no
>>> strong use cases for making them API I suggest just leaving them as
>>> internal/provisional for this release.
>>>
>>> John_______________________________________________
>>> e4-dev mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> e4-dev mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> e4-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> e4-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
>
>
_______________________________________________
e4-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev

Reply via email to