Comment #18 on issue 258 by stolsvik: [Patch] custom annotation based  
injection points
http://code.google.com/p/google-guice/issues/detail?id=258

Definitely highly subjective, I agree. What about this: You'd then be happy  
with
com.ibm.core.String, com.apple.io.Reader, com.bea.net.URL,  
com.microsoft.URI,
com.sun.URI, com.oracle.Connection, com.mysql.Connection, com.jboss.Math,
com.suse.Remote and so on? That would not annoy you the least?

I think there should be a java core (which should have the java package  
name).
Innovation often happens outside the standard, but that shouldn't discourage
assimilation of the good stuff into the standard. The IoC idea, and the  
refinement of
the idea using annotations, are such good stuff. The point of the core is  
to make
interoperability easier. Now we have a situation where several sets of such
annotations exists. Some steps towards solving the problem would be to make  
Guice
handle other annotations.

What is somewhat absurd here, is that there apparently already exists a  
patch that
would make a diverse bunch of people happy about having other options when  
it comes
to annotations, for a diverse set of reasons. But this patch won't even, it  
seems, be
looked into. What is the rationale behind this stubbornness?

Limpbizkit says "[custom annotations] introduces more indirection to Guice,
without adding more value". The idea that this doesn't add value is  
enormously
subjective, IMHO.

--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of this issue, or because you starred this issue.
You may adjust your issue notification preferences at:
http://code.google.com/hosting/settings

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"google-guice-dev" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-guice-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to