hello,
The pattern you sketch would be more fitting for Guice / general DI if it
read:
class A {
@Inject private SqlSession session;
}
class B {
private final A a;
@Inject B(A a) {
this.a = a;
}
}
class C {
public static void main(String[] args) {
Injector injector = Guice.createInjector(...);
B b = injector.getInstance(B.class):
}
}
Meaning that the instance of A is created by Guice, and not by "new."
In a case where you're stuck using "new" (e.g., when migrating code), you
can call injector.injectMembers(instance);
Fred
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 9:52 PM, Stefan <[email protected]>wrote:
> Hi,
> is the following possible with Guice?
>
> class A
> {
> @Inject
> private SqlSession session;
> }
>
> class B
> {
> private A a;
>
> public B()
> {
> a = new A();
> }
> }
>
> class C
> {
> public static void main()
> {
> ...
> B b = injector.getInstance(B.class);
> }
> }
>
> I have a provider binded to class SqlSession. My problem is that
> session field in class A is not injected. Should I create injector in
> constructor of B and get instance of A from injector? Isn't it then
> easier to avoid Guice at all? I'm confused.
>
> --
> 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.
>
>
--
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.
