Hi,
Service properties can only be injected into fields or be 'static' (no
field). However, you can use a configuration property settings the service
property field:
<component name="MyServiceImpl" classname="MyServiceImpl">
<provides specifications="MyService">
<property name="my.prop" field="fooEnabledField"
/>
</provides>
<properties>
<!-- The constructor set the fooEnabledField field -->
<property name="fooEnabled"
constructor-parameter="0"
type="java.lang.Boolean"
mandatory="true"/>
</properties>
</component>
<instance component="MyServiceImpl">
<property name="fooEnabled" value="true"/>
</instance>
<instance component="MyServiceImpl">
<property name="fooEnabled" value="false"/>
</instance>
If you don't need the injected value inside your code, just use a 'static'
service property:
<component name="MyServiceImpl" classname="MyServiceImpl">
<provides specifications="MyService">
<property name="fooEnabled" type="java.lang.Boolean"
mandatory="true/>"
</provides>
</component>
Regards,
Clement
On 23.04.11 00:28, "Paul Neyens" <[email protected]> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I 'm currently discovering ipojo and I like it very much.
>One thing I am trying doesn't seem to work though: setting up a
>service with properties that should also be passed to the instance -
>preferably not through field injection.
>
>I tried some metadata that looks like this:
>
> <component name="MyServiceImpl" classname="MyServiceImpl">
> <provides specifications="MyService">
> <property name="fooEnabled"
> constructor-parameter="0"
> type="java.lang.Boolean"
> mandatory="true"/>
> </provides>
> </component>
> <instance component="MyServiceImpl">
> <property name="fooEnabled" value="true"/>
> </instance>
> <instance component="MyServiceImpl">
> <property name="fooEnabled" value="false"/>
> </instance>
>
>I also tried replacing the constructor-parameter line with
>method="setFooEnabled" (having a corresponding method, of course)
>but only field injection (field="fooEnabled") seems to work.
>In the other cases a service is registered but the property is never
>injected (through constructor or setter).
>
>Am I overlooking some mistake I made, is there another way to achieve
>this or is this a missing feature?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Paul
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
