ld be more time consuming but has a
small memory footprint)
3.) scan all annotations and remove all unnecessary ones.
LieGrue,
strub
--- Bernd Bohmann schrieb am So,
18.1.2009:
Von: Bernd Bohmann
Betreff: Re: Scanning for annotated classes in MyFaces 2
An: "MyFaces Development"
Re: Scanning for annotated classes in MyFaces 2
> An: "MyFaces Development"
> Datum: Sonntag, 18. Januar 2009, 22:00
> Hello,
>
> perhaps the annotation scanning was already solved by
> openejb?
> We should try to create a common annotation module for
> apache projects
>
+1
regards,
gerhard
2009/1/18 Matthias Wessendorf
> On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 1:00 PM, Bernd Bohmann
> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > perhaps the annotation scanning was already solved by openejb?
> > We should try to create a common annotation module for apache projects
> > like openejb, tomcat, c
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 1:00 PM, Bernd Bohmann
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> perhaps the annotation scanning was already solved by openejb?
> We should try to create a common annotation module for apache projects
> like openejb, tomcat, cxf and myfaces.
and openwebbeans
+1
>
> Regards
>
> Bernd
>
>
>
> Ger
Hello,
perhaps the annotation scanning was already solved by openejb?
We should try to create a common annotation module for apache projects
like openejb, tomcat, cxf and myfaces.
Regards
Bernd
Gerhard Petracek schrieb:
> hello,
>
> i agree with simon.
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
>
>
> 2009
hello,
i agree with simon.
regards,
gerhard
2009/1/18 Simon Lessard
> Hi again,
>
> Actually, much more packages have to be scanned. The goal of those
> annotation is 0-Config, so a faces-config.xml might not even be needed
> anymore in the libraries. Anyway, before implementing any kind of
Hi again,
Actually, much more packages have to be scanned. The goal of those
annotation is 0-Config, so a faces-config.xml might not even be needed
anymore in the libraries. Anyway, before implementing any kind of package
filter, I would wait for the final spec version, as long as the scanner is
d
Hi Cagatay,
The issue of what packages to scan is the responsibility of the
specification here however. We cannot simply decide to avoid some packages
in this case, we have to wait for the spec to normalize a way to define
those.
Regards,
~ Simon
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 8:50 AM, Cagatay Civici
> eh... ?
> -1 on that...
>
> -M
LOL! Don't worry. I won't copy their codebase. ;-) I already have a
working implementation.
>
> We could avoid reflection stuff and use byte code exploring. Mojarra 2.0
> uses code from Glassfish codebase for this byte code stuff btw. You may take
> a look at their implementation to give an idea.
eh... ?
-1 on that...
-M
--
Matthias Wessendorf
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpres
>
> I also have some questions for the JSF 2.0 EG, like what classpaths
> need to be scanned by default. Or the policy of dealing with runtime
> invisible annotations (I can read them, but Reflection cannot). I'm
> also interested in general rules regarding class/method signatures.
> For example, d
> That sounds great.
>
> What is your general approach? Just read in the class as byte[], then
> use the class-file-format rules to get to the annotations sections on
> the class and the methods? From my quick scan of the classfile spec it
> seemed reasonably easy to do that...
>
This line is the
On Sun, 2009-01-18 at 14:41 +0100, Jan-Kees van Andel wrote:
> 2009/1/11 Matthias Wessendorf :
> > On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 4:46 AM, Mario Ivankovits wrote:
> >
> > ;-) I really hate to wait on the boot-up.
> > :-)
> >
> > --
> > Matthias Wessendorf
> >
> > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress
2009/1/18 Cagatay Civici :
> Hi Jan,
>
> Thanks for your contribution, yes this could be done without adding a
> dependency.
>
> We could avoid reflection stuff and use byte code exploring. Mojarra 2.0
> uses code from Glassfish codebase for this byte code stuff btw. You may take
> a look at their
Hi Jan,
Thanks for your contribution, yes this could be done without adding a
dependency.
We could avoid reflection stuff and use byte code exploring. Mojarra 2.0
uses code from Glassfish codebase for this byte code stuff btw. You may take
a look at their implementation to give an idea.
I agree
2009/1/11 Matthias Wessendorf :
> On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 4:46 AM, Mario Ivankovits wrote:
>
> ;-) I really hate to wait on the boot-up.
> :-)
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> twitter: http://twitter
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 4:46 AM, Mario Ivankovits wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> not sure on the PERF, but if it is really (proven) the case, I am with
>> you.
>> Well... startup time isn't really a big problem, right? :-)
>
> Is that ironic?
;-) I really hate to wait on the boot-up.
:-)
> In projects with
My 2 cents: Don't load classes to use java.lang.reflect on it:
- What if a class does something bad (or just about anything) in a static
initializer?
For example try to run the code below. It will EXIT THE VM
- Can you be sure that those classes are unloaded again?
- Performance: It is _faster
I've checked mojarra 2.0 some time ago to see how do they implemented this,
well they're using reflection/class way.
Spring's scanning mechanism also gives out of memory if you dont specify a
sub package name to scan.
So, my thought is to implement this in myfaces, it's not a complicated task
as
schrieb am So, 11.1.2009:
>
> > Von: Simon Kitching
> > Betreff: Re: Scanning for annotated classes in MyFaces 2
> > An: "MyFaces Development"
> > Datum: Sonntag, 11. Januar 2009, 12:06
> > On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 19:56 -0700, Matthias Wessendorf
> >
Hi!
> not sure on the PERF, but if it is really (proven) the case, I am with
> you.
> Well... startup time isn't really a big problem, right? :-)
Is that ironic?
In projects with 3000 classes and 60 jar files you are up to 30 seconds, or
even more, scanning time.
Under load, with shale, I saw sc
st is imho a big deal, because we don't need to class-load all
classes.
Otoh I have to admit that I've never did any performance/memory tests comparing
them both.
LieGrue,
strub
--- Simon Kitching schrieb am So, 11.1.2009:
> Von: Simon Kitching
> Betreff: Re: Scanning for
Hi!
> -Original Message-
> From: Jan-Kees van Andel [mailto:jankeesvanan...@gmail.com]
> Mario, I've been looking at the Shale code that handles the annotation
> scanning, but I saw it uses Reflection and standard Java ClassLoaders
> for scanning the classpath for JSF artifacts. What's you
On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 19:56 -0700, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Jan-Kees van Andel
> wrote:
> > I don't think Scannotation itself is an issue, but it has a required
> > dependency on Javassist, which has an LGPL license. Isn't that a
> > problem?
>
> hrm, I think
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 11:34 AM, Andrew Robinson
wrote:
> Feel free to use my code for facelets annotation deployment:
>
> http://jsf-comp.sourceforge.net/components/facelets-deployment/index.html
> http://jsf-comp.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/jsf-comp/trunk/facelets/annotation-deployment/
> http:
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Jan-Kees van Andel
wrote:
> I don't think Scannotation itself is an issue, but it has a required
> dependency on Javassist, which has an LGPL license. Isn't that a
> problem?
hrm, I think not really, b/c it's not a direct dependency.
>
> Using Scannotation, howe
Feel free to use my code for facelets annotation deployment:
http://jsf-comp.sourceforge.net/components/facelets-deployment/index.html
http://jsf-comp.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/jsf-comp/trunk/facelets/annotation-deployment/
http://jsf-comp.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/jsf-comp/trunk/facelets/annot
I don't think Scannotation itself is an issue, but it has a required
dependency on Javassist, which has an LGPL license. Isn't that a
problem?
Using Scannotation, however, would definitely ease development.
/Jan-Kees
2009/1/10 Matthias Wessendorf :
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 10:31 AM, Matthias W
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 10:31 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Cagatay Civici
> wrote:
>> I see scannoation in openwebbeans, anyone tried it? As far as I know it's a
>> one man project and dont know if he still maintains it.
>
> ah, so perhaps guice over scannoat
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Cagatay Civici
wrote:
> I see scannoation in openwebbeans, anyone tried it? As far as I know it's a
> one man project and dont know if he still maintains it.
ah, so perhaps guice over scannoation ?
-M
>
> I think reflection&.class stuff is problematic if you do
I see scannoation in openwebbeans, anyone tried it? As far as I know it's a
one man project and dont know if he still maintains it.
I think reflection&.class stuff is problematic if you dont limit the package
name to be scanned.
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 4:44 PM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> >>> I
>>> It might be smart to put this Shale code in a separate project. For
>>> example
>>> in Commons, since there are several Apache projects that need to scan
>>> for
>>> annotations, like EJB3 and JPA projects.
there is something on the new "open web beans" podling (in the incubator)
or, take a l
2009/1/7 Mario Ivankovits :
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Jan-Kees van Andel [mailto:jankeesvanan...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 8:15 AM
>> To: dev@myfaces.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Scanning for annotated classes in MyFaces 2
&g
rom: Jan-Kees van Andel [mailto:jankeesvanan...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 8:15 AM
>> To: dev@myfaces.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Scanning for annotated classes in MyFaces 2
>>
>> It might be smart to put this Shale code in a separate project. For
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jan-Kees van Andel [mailto:jankeesvanan...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 8:15 AM
> To: dev@myfaces.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Scanning for annotated classes in MyFaces 2
>
> It might be smart to put this Shale code in a
e VERY bad.
>>
>> I had this in the past with shale-annotation.
>>
>> There I added such configuration already. We can strip the
>> scanning/parsing
>> out there - I'll contribute if required.
>>
>> Ciao,
>> Mario
>>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Scanning-for-annotated-classes-in-MyFaces-2-tp21318418p21326014.html
Sent from the My Faces - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
hello mario,
sounds good to me
regards,
gerhard
2009/1/7 Mario Ivankovits
> Hi!
>
> > But there are some issues with this:
> > First, what paths to scan? AFAIK the spec doesn't state the classpaths
> > to scan. I suppose only /WEB-INF/lib and /WEB-INF/classes need to be
> > checked, but I ca
Hi!
> But there are some issues with this:
> First, what paths to scan? AFAIK the spec doesn't state the classpaths
> to scan. I suppose only /WEB-INF/lib and /WEB-INF/classes need to be
> checked, but I can't find it in the spec.
What ever the spec says, we definitely should provide a configurat
I think we should avoid scannotation, not that it's bad but because it's a
dependency.
MyFaces already has more dependencies compared to mojarra afaik and
increasing those doesn't sound good.
Classpath scanning is a tricky business and it's good both performance and
computing wise to limit the sc
Hi Jan-Kees,
I think it's ok for Apache projects to depend on external libraries that are
not licensed under ASL 2.0. However that would be some extra dependencies
for MyFaces and we try to minimize those. On the other hand the gain might
worth it in this case imho if those libraries are deployed
Hi,
The JSF 2.0 spec requires an implementation to support several
annotations, like @ManagedBean.
Has anyone already thought of a possible implementation for this requirement?
IMHO, there is only one option, and that is scanning the classpath at
application startup, because you don't want the ov
41 matches
Mail list logo
