On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 2:41 PM, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Well right now noone calls close() and things are OK. Not calling > close() is not the end of the world; it just provides a nice graceful > shutdown above and beyond killing the JVM or finalisers which may or > may not be invoked - so its mostly a kinda optimisation really. > I understand the need. I'd just consider putting close() on a different class. Not everyone needs it, and it's strange to have a close() on something that's called "Injector". As a middle ground, you could create a subtype of Injector specific for lifecycle management. MulticastInjector or something :-) Guice.createMulticastInjector(...) Robbie --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "google-guice" 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?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
