Hi Niclas, Thank you for your suggestion! I haven't had time to put it together yet, but I'll have a go at it during the week (busy schedule).
What I want to do is to have a RouteSpecification ValueComposite to enforce that @ Immutable Property<Location> origin() != @Immutable Property<Location> destination() upon instantiation (?) of the ValueComposite so that you can't create a RouteSpecification that is in an invalid state. Would you place such a check in the LifeCycle create method according to your suggestion too? Or is there a much simpler way to enforce unequality between two properties in a ValueComposite? Cheers, Marc On 13/01/2011, at 01.09, Niclas Hedhman wrote: > On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 1:34 AM, Marc Grue <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 12/01/2011, at 01.41, Niclas Hedhman wrote: >>> The handling of Property methods is not special hard-coded internals. >>> If you look at Composite type, you will see that it has a >>> PropertyMixin declared, which you can replace with your own >>> implementation. So, I suggest that the Mixin extends PropertyMixin and >>> then implements Lifecycle, that should work. >> >> Since PropertyMixin is final I can't do: > > Ok, I didn't recalled that. Class isn't bigger than you can clone it > source wise... Isn't it beautifu????!?? > > @AppliesTo( { PropertyMixin.PropertyFilter.class } ) > public final class MyPropertyMixin > implements InvocationHandler, Lifecycle > { > @State > private StateHolder state; > > public Object invoke( Object proxy, Method method, Object[] args ) > throws Throwable > { > return state.getProperty( method ); > } > > // + Lifecycle your methods > } _______________________________________________ qi4j-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
