Comment #2 on issue 390 by sberlin: bindInterceptor in child injector http://code.google.com/p/google-guice/issues/detail?id=390
Many, many issues with child injectors seem to be stemming from JIT bindings being added to the parent injector. I see the necessity in this for many cases, but I wonder if there's a way we can help coders ensure code is doing what it wants. I wonder if solving issue 343 would help. If users want to be be certain their bindings are ending up in the right place, they can instruct parent & child modules to disable JIT bindings (with the exception of linked bindings, which should be pseudo-explicit). I think that would solve 99% of the confusion surrounding child bindings. -- 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
