Let me a couple of days (this weekend) and I will try to simply my original issue to a test case. I still think that maybe something funny is going on under some specific conditions.
On Tuesday, August 20, 2013 10:57:47 PM UTC-4, Sam Berlin wrote: > > Interesting. I haven't fully digested it, but if its causing surprising > behavior that you're having trouble explaining, then I think a test case > would be useful. If only so we can examine it more closely and figure out > if there is indeed a bug. > On Aug 20, 2013 9:20 PM, <[email protected] <javascript:>> wrote: > >> Sorry that I'm still not 100% sure, and I do not have a test case to >> show, but I'm pretty sure I did find the main cause of this "issue" in my >> application. >> >> I created an interface : >> >> ------------- >> public interface IInitableAfterCreation >> { >> public void init(); >> } >> ------------- >> >> And this is what I check in the *Matcher* of my *InjectionListener* : >> >> ------------- >> @Override >> public boolean matches(Binding<?> t) >> { >> return >> IInitableAfterCreation.class.isAssignableFrom(t.getKey().getTypeLiteral().getRawType()); >> } >> ------------- >> >> The problem is that I was using this *IInitableAfterCreation* interface >> on my *implementations* objects, not on their interfaces. For example : >> >> ------------- >> public class MyWidget implements IMyWidget, IInitableAfterCreation >> { >> @Override >> public void init() >> { >> } >> // ... >> } >> ------------- >> >> This doesn't work! But if I make the* IMyWidge*t *interface* extend >> *IInitableAfterCreation >> *, then it works : >> >> ------------- >> public interface IMyWidget extends IInitableAfterCreation {} >> >> public class MyWidget implements IMyWidget >> { >> @Override >> public void init() >> { >> } >> // ... >> } >> ------------- >> >> Is this the way it should work? Some of my *IMyWidget* implementations >> that don't need to be initialized at startup will still have to implement >> the *init()* method? >> >> Anyway, the issue seems less important than what I though, that's good >> news! :-) >> >> Let me know if you still want a test case or if this is not a real >> problem actually (I would appreciate to better understand the way it works >> though!). Thanks! >> >> >> ******** >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "google-guice" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected] <javascript:>. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]<javascript:> >> . >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-guice. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "google-guice" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-guice. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
