implementation.osgi and implementation.spring reuse introspection code from
implementation.java. Both of these can avoid dependencies on
implementation.java if the introspection/injection code is refactored to
provide a proper SPI.



On 3/4/08, Matthew Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Bad form to reply to my own posting I know but I wanted to ask: can or
> should I raise this as formal requirement in some manner? It seems to me
> that I won't be the only one who wants an architected way to reuse the
> functionality from <implementation.java> - anything that is like a
> servlet, in being both a java class and something else at the same time,
> might want to do so.
>
> Matthew Peters
>
>
>
>
> Matthew Peters/UK/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 29/02/2008 17:50
> Please respond to
> [email protected]
>
>
> To
> [email protected]
> cc
>
> Subject
> Re: What are my chances of being able to "inherit" behaviour from
> implementation.java?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi Jean-Sebastien, thanks for a fast response.
>
> What I am most interested in is the introspection and the ability to drive
>
> injection. Life cycle and invocation on the other hand are not a concernt
> because servlets have a very defined lifecycle and ideally that should all
>
> be looked after by the web container.
>
> Here is an example:
>
> The .composite file might look like this:
>    <component name="StoreServletServiceComponent">
>       <implementation.servlet class="store.StoreServlet"/>
>       <reference name="catalogService" target="CatalogServiceComponent"
> />
>       <property ... some special servlet-specific properties> ...
> </property>
>    </component>
>
>    <component name="CatalogServiceComponent">
>        <implementation.java class="services.CatalogImpl"/>
>    </component>
>
> And with the servlet containing a setter for the reference, so looking for
>
> all the world like a java component in this respect
>        @Reference
>        public void setCatalogService(Catalog catalogService) {
>            this.catalogService = catalogService;
>        }
>        private Catalog catalogService;
>
> Yet doing something special with some of the properties, presenting them
> as servlet init parameters, or example. So, I'm interested in:
>
> 1, introspection for references and properties
> 2. driving injection for references
> 3. driving injecttion for some properties
> 4. not doing injection for some other properties but doing something
> different for them
>
>
> Matthew Peters
>
>
>
>
> Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 29/02/2008 16:51
> Please respond to
> [email protected]
>
>
> To
> [email protected]
> cc
>
> Subject
> Re: What are my chances of being able to "inherit" behaviour from
> implementation.java?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Matthew Peters wrote:
> > Suppose I wanted to create a new implementation that shared much of the
> > behaviour of <implementation.java> and then added a bit. Suppose I
> wanted
> > to make <implementation.servlet> for example, to be an implementation
> that
> > did what <implement.java> does WRT understanding @Reference and
> @Property
> > and getters and setters, but did some extra - for example looked in the
> > web.xml file for the servlet and added some extra properties. How could
> I
> > architect this to take advantage of all the code that already exists
> > within the support for <implementation.java>?
> >
> > Matthew Peters
> >
>
> We may need to refactor some of that function to make it available to
> others as a proper SPI. Could you describe the bits you'd want to reuse
> in more details?
>
> - some of the implementation model?
>
> - introspection of a Java class and creation of the corresponding
> componentType model?
>
> - injection of properties and references?
>
> - invocation? I guess it's different here as a servlet has a fixed
> interface pattern?
>
> - anything else?
>
> --
> Jean-Sebastien
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Unless stated otherwise above:
> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
> 741598.
> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Unless stated otherwise above:
> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
> 741598.
> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Thank you...

Regards,

Rajini

Reply via email to