[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-728?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12653570#action_12653570
]
Kevin Brown commented on SHINDIG-728:
-------------------------------------
"In the second case, it will blow up. Given the fact that this mapper is used
to map transfer objects onto concrete classes, I feel that the performance gain
by not going to Guice for non-interface types outweights the risk of blowing
up. If it really happens, we look at the use case and reengineer."
Isn't this cached? see also your previous post reasoning about why constructing
the object is acceptable.
> The Shindig social-api should not use Guice annotations to find its
> implementation classes.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SHINDIG-728
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-728
> Project: Shindig
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: RESTful API (Java)
> Reporter: Henning Schmiedehausen
> Attachments: 0001-A-sane-InterfaceClassMapper.patch,
> 0001-Add-testcase-for-InterfaceClassMapper.patch
>
>
> Currently, the social-api uses some clever annotation magic to find its
> implementation classes inside the XStream marshalling/unmarshalling code.
> This code actually does not work with custom object implementations.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
