When I implement Dialogs these days, it is not that easy to bring it
together with Dependency Injection. When a Dialog is Part of the
Application Model I hope it is easy to get dependencies in the same way I
can do it with a Part. Nowadays when I want to get e.g. a Service into a
Dialog i have two Options:

1. Drop in the Service manually cia a Setter or the Constructor of the
Dialog
2. Use ContextInjectionFactory.make

When a Dialog is Part of the Application Model and if I understand the new
APIs correctly I simply need to define the MDialog in my model, connect the
Dialog with a Pojo-Class via its Contribution-URI and afterwards I can just
do a

@Inject MyService service

to get the Service the standard way...


I am not sure if the new MDialogs/MWizards is adressing this (I have to
less informations about it actually, what Bug is it?) but this is the "
problem " I personally have actually with Dialogs in my daily work.


Marc





2014/1/14 Doug Schaefer <[email protected]>

>  I’ll ask a naïve newby question :). If we want to model dialogs and
> wizards, why not go all the way down to widgets? Other than they lifecycle
> of a modal window, what benefit does modelling these get you?
>
>  Doug.
>
>   From: Marc Teufel <[email protected]>
> Reply-To: E4 Project developer mailing list <[email protected]>
> Date: Tuesday, January 14, 2014 at 12:43 AM
> To: E4 Project developer mailing list <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [e4-dev] MDialog / MWizard will be removed in M5
>
>   Same for me here, please try keep it. I am working on a bigger business
> solution based on pure e4 and I am already dealing with Dialogs (and
> Wizards) so I know about the pain with them... I am interested in getting
> these new features into the Luna Release because I hope things are getting
> easier by integrating Dialogs and Wizards into the Application Model. If
> you are interested, I can offer to test/implement the new API in my
> solution. The only problem I actually have is, i don't know where to start.
> Is there any documentation of the new API, Wikipages, Samples or atleast
> Unit-Tests where I can see how the new elements have to be used. Also
> interesting: Does the Application Model Editor already support
> theenhancements or do I have to write the XML manually by myself ?
>
>  Greetings, Marc.
>
>
>
>
> 2014/1/13 Paweł Doleciński <[email protected]>
>
>>   Hi folks,
>>
>>  please do not do it! Wizards in model is what I was waiting for. We've
>> got a real use case for it, as we need to model workflows. Wizard seems to
>> be a perfect solution for us, especially if you can model it and display as
>> a part.
>>
>>  Perhaps, if you could wait a bit more we might present an use case and
>> general solution based on our special case. Maybe someone would be
>> interested.
>>
>>  Cheers,
>>  Paweł.
>>
>> --
>> Pozdrawiam / Best regards
>> Paweł Doleciński
>>
>>
>> On 13 January 2014 21:58, Tom Schindl <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>>  What is the maximum timeframe? I really want to keep them and make use
>>> of them in my javafx port!
>>>
>>>  Cann't we mark them as experimental?
>>>
>>>  Tom
>>>
>>> Von meinem iPhone gesendet
>>>
>>> Am 13.01.2014 um 21:22 schrieb Eric Moffatt <[email protected]>:
>>>
>>>    Folks, since we've received no relevant feedback on using these new
>>> model elements we anticipate removing them for Luna. The model should only
>>> contain elements for which there is a clear use and at least one
>>> implemented use case, not for things that *might* be useful at some point.
>>> We can always add it back later (post-luna) once it has become clearer what
>>> the usage patterns are.
>>>
>>> In thinking about this I'm wondering whether we should be doing the new
>>> stuff first in an incubator model based off of the main UIElements.ecore.
>>> This would allow for investigations of various proposed model shapes while
>>> not churning the API model, what do you think ?
>>>
>>> If anybody has examples and wants to make a case for keeping the
>>> elements in the model come forward *now *.
>>>
>>> Onwards,
>>> Eric
>>>
>>>    _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
>  --
> Mail: [email protected]
> Web: http://www.teufel.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> e4-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev
>
>


-- 
Mail: [email protected]
Web: http://www.teufel.net
_______________________________________________
e4-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/e4-dev

Reply via email to