On 6/29/11 15:17 , Menzel, Toni wrote:
Thanks Rickard for looking into this.
When you say "got generic lookups like this to work.." you refer to 2.0 branch
status, correct ?
Yes.
As of now, I think the most necessary work is on the "registering a generic
service" side.
To write it up like what I know in Guice (with all the clutter I personally
don't like):
bind(new TypeLiteral<Foo<Bar>>(){}).to(X);
The thing is, if X is declared as
interface X
implements Foo<Bar>, ServiceComposite{}
then that is all that is needed. Qi4j can find all the needed generics
info from that. Is that enough?
As of 2.0 branch, looking into it as I think this is crucial when considering
Qi4J, next to its strong DDD focus also as a valuable DI framework.
I would see ( maybe a future version of ) qi4j as a superset of DI frameworks.
- or would you say that pure DI frameworks (mostly familiar with Guice) are by concept
superior to qi4j in its domain and you shoult never attempt to think "guice" in
qi4j ?
No, Qi4j should be able to handle pretty much all of the things you'd
expect from a DI framework. The implementation might be slightly
different though, as in the above. But conceptually it should be on the
same level, I hope/think.
/Rickard
_______________________________________________
qi4j-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
