The properties are not all in one class. They would be spread throughout and in fact are an unknown set (this is sorta the point in fact, to allow configuration of any existing bean properties via a file without requiring changes to the java code).
The bind properties is going to do exactly what I am already doing. What I really need is a way to indicate that the properties should be injected for just one bean each. The info I have is (1) the bean class/name (2) the property name (3) the property value I want to give this stuff to guice so that when it instantiates the bean it will have the right value to inject and I don't want it do inject that value for every bean which happens to use the same property name. -AZ On Oct 5, 3:05 pm, "Robbie Vanbrabant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Part of the solution would be looking at > Names.bindProperties(...):http://tinyurl.com/4wl5edand using > @Inject(optional=true). > > The other part (naming convention) would require a custom injection > mechanism, potentially solved with Guice 2.0 constructor interception > (recently discussed on the mailing list). BUT if your properties all reside > in a single class, you could also not use Guice and use reflection to set a > bunch of properties, and then bind that instance using toInstance. > > Robbie > > On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 3:55 PM, AZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I need to pull config options for beans (strings and ints and the > > like) from a file before bootstrapping and then push these config > > settings into the beans as they are starting up (replacing existing > > settings if needed). I just wanted to see if anyone else has done this > > already and has any suggestions. > > > I am trying to do it like this: > > bindConstant().annotatedWith(Names.named(key)).to(value); > > > This is sorta getting me what I want but not completely. There are 3 > > issues I have not figured out that I am hoping someone else has: > > 1) I know exactly which bean the key and value should go with (if it > > exists, if not then this is ok and I will skip it) so I want to be > > able specify that so that I don't set the value on some other bean > > which happened to use the same key for a name. > > 2) I would prefer not to deal with names at all. The name of the > > setter method is fine here (sans "set") so I would prefer to simply be > > able to use that without requiring the annotation. In the case of > > constructors I want it to be able to use the Named annotation but > > without changing the vaue for all beans that use the same name (like > > #1). > > 3) I don't want things to fail if the constant is invalid. That has > > not really been a problem with the current approach because if the > > named constant is unused then things are ok but if I say "for bean A > > set value to B for field C" I want it to happily say "no field C" and > > keep going. > > > I suppose this may all be easy if there is a way to put in an > > interceptor which is triggered when each bean is being created so > > maybe I just need to know how to do that. > > Thanks for any advice > > -AZ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
