Thanks, Peter. That could actually be useful in some cases.
I guess what I’m really looking for right now though is a way to inject a
lambda function.
I suppose what I could do it have a 2-step configuration: the first step would
have constant configuration values being read as per usual via the
Configurator, and my lambdas provided from a Java class (or perhaps parsed from
a configuration file if I can find a way to do that). Then for the second step
the two could be combined, put into a Dictionary, and the actual service would
be instantiated based on the combined constant+lambda configuration.
I would ideally like to keep the constants and the lambdas together in a
configuration file, but maybe that is just not possible right now.
In any case, this sounds very frameworky to me, so I was hoping that something
like this already exists…
Cheers,
=David
> On Jul 15, 2018, at 1:01, Peter Kriens <peter.kri...@aqute.biz> wrote:
>
> The v2Archive OSGi enRoute has a Configurer that uses a subset of the bnd
> Macro language. This supports ${system;..} and ${system_allow_fail}. These
> take shell command lines.
>
> P
>
>
>
>> On 14 Jul 2018, at 09:07, David Leangen via osgi-dev <osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org
>> <mailto:osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Thanks, BJ.
>>
>> Yeah, right now I am using a Dictionary exactly how you mentioned, but I am
>> wondering if there is a way to maintain it the same way I do as for my
>> configurations.
>>
>> Has there ever been a discussion about possibly including this type of thing
>> in the spec? For instance, a spec could include a script (saved in a
>> configuration file), and the script could be parsed and included in a
>> Configuration.
>>
>> Has nobody ever encountered this use case? If you have, how did you solve it?
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> =David
>>
>>
>>> On Jul 14, 2018, at 5:04, BJ Hargrave <hargr...@us.ibm.com
>>> <mailto:hargr...@us.ibm.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Component properties are basically service properties which are basically
>>> meant to be things that can go in a Configuration:
>>> https://osgi.org/specification/osgi.core/7.0.0/framework.module.html#i3217016
>>>
>>> <https://osgi.org/specification/osgi.core/7.0.0/framework.module.html#i3217016>.
>>> Complex objects including objects implementing functional interfaces are
>>> not in scope for a Configuration.
>>>
>>> That said, I imagine you could pass any value object in the Dictionary
>>> supplied to ComponentFactory.newInstance since they are not stored in
>>> Configuration Admin and SCR would not police the value object types :-)
>>> --
>>>
>>> BJ Hargrave
>>> Senior Technical Staff Member, IBM // office: +1 386 848 1781
>>> OSGi Fellow and CTO of the OSGi Alliance // mobile: +1 386 848 3788
>>> hargr...@us.ibm.com <mailto:hargr...@us.ibm.com>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original message -----
>>> From: David Leangen via osgi-dev <osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org
>>> <mailto:osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org>>
>>> Sent by: osgi-dev-boun...@mail.osgi.org
>>> <mailto:osgi-dev-boun...@mail.osgi.org>
>>> To: David Leangen via osgi-dev <osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org
>>> <mailto:osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org>>
>>> Cc:
>>> Subject: [osgi-dev] Functions as configuration
>>> Date: Fri, Jul 13, 2018 3:32 PM
>>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> Is there any way to include functions as part of a component configuration?
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> =David
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OSGi Developer Mail List
>>> osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org <mailto:osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org>
>>> https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
>>> <https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OSGi Developer Mail List
>> osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org <mailto:osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org>
>> https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
>
_______________________________________________
OSGi Developer Mail List
osgi-dev@mail.osgi.org
https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
