> > I agree that we should not focus on any given container.
> > Apparently we cannot
> > agree upon which concept JavaBean/CDI is the way to go, so
> I then move
> > in favour of supporting both. That way we can run in any POJO
> > container. As someone (sorry forgot who) posted earlier
Me ;-)
> this is quite
> > easy as the CDI constructor can be implemented like:
> >
> > SomePOJO (String a, String b, String c, String d) {
> > this();
> > setA(a); setB(b); setC(c); setD(d); }
> >
> > Alongside the mandatory no-args constructor.
> >
>
> AFAIK this wont work, as CDI relies on a constructors to
> determine dependencies. If there is a no-argument
> constructor, then it will determine that there are no
> dependencies! If you support both, then you will have to
> extend the classses to make a CDI version:
>
> public class SomePOJOCDI{
> SomePOJOCDI (String a, String b, String c, String d)
> {
> super();
> setA(a); setB(b); setC(c); setD(d);
> }
> }
I think we should stop loosing time in this never-ending discussion.
We can create SDI POJO (JavaBeans) with setters and no-argument constructor
and then create an extended class with only the new constructor for the CDI.
public class SomePOJO {
SomePOJO () {}
public function setA(a);
public function setB(b);
public function setC(c);
public function setD(d);
}
public class SomePOJOCDI estends SomePOJO {
SomePOJOCDI (String a, String b, String c, String d)
{
super();
setA(a); setB(b); setC(c); setD(d);
}
}
It seems to me the simplest way to support both concept and both container
styles.
Anyway, I think we should convert the james object to POJO, I don't care CDI
vs SDI (it is really easy to convert them later). The developer that will do
the conversion job will decide if he prefer CDI or SDI, I think this should
not be decided before.
If you really want CDI or SDI then do the refactoring job before someone
else does it the "wrong" way! ;-)
Stefano
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
