IT seems like the new updates behave differently. It's enough to just
declare a function @Provides @Exposed @Named and skip the
expose() method entirely ?
On Nov 30, 11:53 pm, Mikkel Petersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry im using chrome and it suddenly posted :)
>
> OK anyway, what i was saying
>
> @Provides
> @Exposed
> @Named("boxer1")
> public MovingRagdoll exposeRagdoll() {
> return boxer;
> }
> public void configurePrivateBindings() {
> super.configurePrivateBindings();
>
> expose(MovingRagdoll.class).annotatedWith(Names.named("boxer1"));
> }
>
> Looks very clumsy to me and its not obvious to anyone why it's
> necessary. (with the extra @exposed @Named function
>
> Why not ?
>
> public void configurePrivateBindings() {
> expose(MovingRagdoll.class).annotatedWith(Names.named
> ("boxer1")).toInstance(boxer);
> }
>
> Problem with the @Exposed @Named notation is that you cant reuse your
> module, you have to write another module that injects (exposes) to
> another name.
>
> expose(MovingRagdoll.class).annotatedWith(Names.named(nameOfBoxer); is
> reusing..
>
> Hope this is clear.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
