I have bound them separately with:
bind(TestAssisted.Factory.class).toProvider(FactoryProvider.newFactory(TestAssisted.Factory.class,
TestAssisted.class));
functionTypeLiteral = new TypeLiteral<Function<String,
TestAssisted>>() {
};
bind(functionTypeLiteral).to(TestAssisted.Factory.class);
but I get the same error. Whatever process Guice is using to whip up
an implementation to the Assisted factory apparently can't handle
multiple methods, even if it is equals(Object).
But I still want to use Function in the end. Only the module will
know that it is actually pointing to TestAssisted.Factory.
On Nov 6, 5:53 pm, Fred Faber <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dan,
>
> You shouldn't be binding the Function itself; instead, you're expected to
> bind TestAssisted.Factory, which creates instances of your Function.
>
> -Fred
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Dan Billings <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I'm attempting to short-circuit a lot of code by making my Factory
> > interfaces extend Guava's Function:
>
> >http://guava-libraries.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/javadoc/com/google/co...
>
> > public class TestAssisted {
> > interface Factory extends Function<String, TestAssisted> {}
>
> > �...@inject
> > public TestAssisted(@Assisted String contents){}
> > }
>
> > I then bind it with:
> > bind(new TypeLiteral<Function<String,TestAssisted>>()
> > {}) .toProvider( FactoryProvider.newFactory(
> > TestAssisted.Factory.class,TestAssisted.class );
>
> > This seems to be okay, but Guice trips over Function's equal's method:
>
> > No implementation for java.lang.String annotated with
> > @com.google.inject.assistedinject.Assisted(value=) was bound.
> > while locating java.lang.String annotated with
> > @com.google.inject.assistedinject.Assisted(value=)
> > for parameter 0 at
> > com.billco.commons.test.TestAssisted.<init>(TestAssisted.java:18)
> > at com.google.common.base.Function.equals(Function.java:1)
>
> > Do I have any options to have Guice more or less ignore the "equals"
> > method declared in Function? I can't think of a good way to stick to
> > interfaces and yet remove the necessity to implement "equals".
>
> > Thanks for your help,
> > -Dan
>
> > --
> > 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]<google-guice%2bunsubscr...@google
> > groups.com>
> > .
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/google-guice?hl=en.
--
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.
