Hi Rickard and Niclas,
I think it would be great if you would give it a try with the
class->TransientComposite! Would it also be possible to inject @Structure
elements?
I haven't had time to respond to your other answers earlier, but will hopefully
get time later this month. I'm following the qi4j progress from the side line
for now and appreciate your efforts a lot!
Cheers,
Marc
On 09/02/2011, at 05.40, Rickard Öberg wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> One more thing that came up during the F2F that Niclas and me had the other
> day was how to get concerns+sideeffects+mixins into regular objects. I had
> started on that since it was needed for DCI, but didn't get very far as there
> were too many weird issues.
>
> Our conclusion in the end was that we will not change the current Object
> handling, i.e. it won't be possible to register classes with "addObjects" and
> have them use constraints and concerns etc. Instead we will try to allow a
> Class to be a definition for a TransientComposite, since in the end the whole
> thing will end up as a composite. Then regular objects are still
> "lightweight", and yet if you have a class that you want to use as a
> composite, with itself being a "default mixin" so to speak, then that is easy
> to do.
>
> In practice it would look something like this:
> @Concerns(SomeConcern.class)
> @SideEffects(SomeSideEffect.class)
> public class MyClass
> {
> public MyClass(@This SomeMixin mixin, @Service service)
> {
> ..
> }
>
> public void doStuff(@MinValue(5) int foo)
> {
> }
> }
> ---
> instead of:
> @Concerns(SomeConcern.class)
> @SideEffects(SomeSideEffect.class)
> public interface MyClass
> extends TransientComposite
> {
> class Mixin
> {
> public MyClass(@This SomeMixin mixin, @Service service)
> {
> ..
> }
>
> public void doStuff(@MinValue(5) int foo)
> {
> }
> }
> }
> ---
>
> The same rules as before apply with regard to typed Concerns, i.e. the class
> has to implement an interface if it wants methods to be "intercepted".
> Generic concerns should be possible to apply without interfaces though. Note
> that it has a reference to a mixin, but obviously, all mixins will be
> private, i.e. not exposed to outside clients.
>
> Something like that. What do you think? Should I give it a try?
>
> /Rickard
>
> _______________________________________________
> qi4j-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
_______________________________________________
qi4j-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
