Oh, sorry, didnt see, you explained that in your first answer.
On Dec 1, 1:58 am, Mikkel Petersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok, why do we have to do this, is it some kind of workaround because
> something better is not possible ? To me it's confusing and somehow
> don't mix in well with the original "bind()" method. I think ideally
> expose() should just work like bind(), so you can do things like expose
> (IPerson.class).toInstance(new Person());
> On Dec 1, 1:38 am, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Yeah, if your @Provides method has @Exposed, it gets exposed
> > automatically.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
