Before I create an issue with Gauva: Couldn't Guice cope with the methods of Object if they are, for whatever reason, declared in an interface?
On Nov 6, 6:54 pm, Sam Berlin <[email protected]> wrote: > I wonder if Function can just drop the equals method. It won't be a > backwards incompatible change, and I'm not certain how useful it actually > is. Certainly something to bring up with the Guava folks. > > sam > > > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 7:43 PM, Fred Faber <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dan, > > > I see what you're saying...and it's certainly an interesting question. > > > I'd file a FR for this as I see the utility of the integration w/ guava, > > especially given the prevalence of Function. > > > -Fred > > > On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 7:15 PM, Fred Faber <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> Sorry, I see now I misread your post. Let me have a re-read. > > >> On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Fred Faber <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>> Dan, > > >>> The problem is that you're trying to create a binding for a class that > >>> should only be created through its corresponding factory. This is why you > >>> see errors when binding your Function class itself. > > >>> What is the expectation you have w.r.t. injecting the Function? > > >>> -Fred > > >>> On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Dan Billings <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>> I have bound them separately with: > > >>>> bind(TestAssisted.Factory.class).toProvider(FactoryProvider.newFactory(Test > >>>> Assisted.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> > >>>> <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]<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]<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.
