Jesse, In practice, the dozen or so bindings are more like 50 or 100; and very fragile. Add one use of a proxy, and now you need to add this binding to all the entry points. (You might wonder why we don't have a common module with all of those. Many are singleton scoped and so we do not want to create them in systems that do not need them.)
Since this has bitten us a lot in the past, we wanted to spend the time to replace this with a generic and robust solution. I'll do the improvements and report back. I'll also address Stuart's comments about whitespace edits and such to have a clean patch. PL On Jun 2, 5:35 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote: > On Jun 2, 7:41 am, Pascal-Louis <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Would that address your concerns? > > It would, but it still doesn't quite pay for its complexity. > Autobinders would let you replace something structurally simple but > verbose (a dozen or so repetitive bind() statements) with something > structurally complex but compact (some reflection to implement > JitProvider). -- 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.
