Filing the issue is good. I'm going to end up chatting with Jesse
Wilson tomorrow, and I think we can chat through the Dagger side of
things. If no action is heard on the issue, we can reach out to the
spring and CDI folks directly.
On 8 Apr 2014, at 8:48, Tavian Barnes wrote:
Well the atinject list isn't publicly writeable, but I submitted an
issue
at https://code.google.com/p/atinject/issues/detail?id=28 which got
posted
to the list too so hopefully people see it.
Also atinject-observer seems broken, it's missing all 4 posts from
2012 and
later.
On Tuesday, 8 April 2014 11:29:03 UTC-4, Sam Berlin wrote:
Yeah, I'd try the atinject list & if it gets no response, try the
individual lists. Hopefully it won't be too controversial a
question.
sam
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 11:26 AM, Tavian Barnes
<[email protected]<javascript:>
wrote:
On Monday, 7 April 2014 17:47:48 UTC-4, Sam Berlin wrote:
I'd be open to any of the following:
a) Hard-error on a qualifer/bindingannotation on types
b) Support qualifer/bindingannotation on types, but fail if it also
exists on the variable
Makes sense. I do think one of them should be done before Guice 4.0
is
out since that'll be the first release supporting Java 8 anyway.
I'll try
to cook up a patch for (a) and then (b) on top of it.
Though, since this'd be a change to the way jsr330 things are
interpreted, seems like it'd be best to poll the jsr330 folks and
make sure
all various implementations (Dagger, Spring, etc..) are on-board
with the
same solution.
Good point. The atinject list seems dead though, should I post there
or
manually poll Dagger, Spring, HK2, CDI, etc.?
sam
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 5:24 PM, Tavian Barnes
<[email protected]>wrote:
Java 8 allows annotations to appear everywhere a type is used,
which
allows for things like
Provider<@Named("name") Thing> provider;
instead of
@Named("name") Provider<Thing> provider;
The first way, to me, seems more semantically accurate, because it
reads "provider of named thing" rather than "named provider of
thing."
However, there would obviously be a lot of complication in
choosing to
support this syntax. It would be difficult to use the new
AnnotatedType
reflection APIs and still support Java 6/7. Ambiguous cases like
@Named("name") Provider<@Named("otherName") Thing> provider;
would have to be detected too. Of the three choices:
(1) Ignore binding annotations on types
(2) Support binding annotations on types
(3) Give a warning/error for binding annotations on types,
I assume Guice is sticking with (1) for now? If someone wrote a
patchset to support AnnotatedTypes in a backwards-compatible way
(strategy
pattern for example), would (2), (3), or neither be most likely to
get
merged?
--
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/d/optout.
--
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/d/optout.
--
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/d/optout.
Christian Gruber :: Google, Inc. :: Java Core Libraries :: Dependency
Injection
email: [email protected] :::: mobile: +1 (646) 807-9839
--
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/d/optout.
