Hi,
As I'm converting over to my own custom class generation instead of
CGLIB I stumbled upon a case that didn't work, and as far as I can tell,
*shouldn't work*!
It's in AssociationDecoratorTest. A ManyAssociation<Employee> is being
defined as its own type like so:
@Mixins( DecoratorMixin.class )
@Concerns( EmployeesAuditConcern.class )
public interface Employees
extends ManyAssociation<Person>, TransientComposite
{
}
---
Which is then used like this:
public interface CompanyEntity
extends EntityComposite
{
Employees employees();
@Optional
Boss boss();
}
---
The idea is to be able to customize the methods on the Employees
association. The reason this shouldn't work is because ManyAssociation
extends from AssociationInfo which has type/metaInfo methods, that are
*the same* as in TransientComposite! When you have the same method
coming from two interfaces the result of calling them is unknown. When I
generated the methods myself this became obvious, since the code
generation failed on duplicate method implementation (=GOOD!).
So the question is really: should we allow association types to be
customized like this? (same goes for properties I guess)
In my own code I would probably see ManyAssociation and Property as
implementation details, rather than something I expose, and so any code
that provides rules for how to modify them would be in the mixin using them.
What do you think? Are there valid reasons for wanting to customize
ManyAssociation/Property, instead of putting that code into a Mixin that
uses it?
/Rickard
_______________________________________________
qi4j-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
