On Oct 14, 2:05 am, "James Strachan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bob/Jesse - any feedback on the reasoning for this restriction - > forcing a mandatory @Inject on a class with a single public > constructor with arguments? Adding a new constructor should not break your code. If we supported lone constructors, we'd get into trouble that way. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
- should a class with a single public constructor with par... James Strachan
- Re: should a class with a single public constructor... Robbie Vanbrabant
- Re: should a class with a single public constru... James Strachan
- Re: should a class with a single public con... Robbie Vanbrabant
- Re: should a class with a single public constructor... James Strachan
- Re: should a class with a single public constru... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: should a class with a single public con... Gili Tzabari
- Re: should a class with a single public... Bob Lee
- Re: should a class with a single p... Gili Tzabari
- Re: should a class with a sing... Bob Lee
- Re: should a class with a ... Gili Tzabari
- Re: should a class with a ... Bob Lee
- Re: should a class with a ... Gili Tzabari
- Re: should a class with a ... Brian Pontarelli
- Re: should a class with a ... Gili Tzabari
- Re: should a class with a ... Brian Pontarelli
