For anyone who may find this, the problem, as indicated in my last message, was the @Bind annotated method was not being called. This was due to the method being named setX rather than bindX AND Bind's id attribute not being set. Hope that helps someone.
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 2:38 PM, lessonz <[email protected]> wrote: > Just realized ServiceController has a default value of true. So, that's > why it appears to be working. So, it seems my @Bind is never being called. > > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 11:08 AM, lessonz <[email protected]>wrote: > >> I should also add if I use: >> >> @ServiceController >> private boolean valid; >> >> it appears to work. >> >> >> >> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:52 AM, lessonz <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> I'm trying to use the @ServiceController annotation to handle >>> registering a service. In this case I need to use it because I have a field >>> the service really should have an @Requires relationship with, but I cannot >>> use that annotation because I also need to provide a setter. So, that >>> setter uses the @Bind annotation and sets the service controller field to >>> true. This method is being called as gogo's instance command shows the >>> value of the @Bind field as resolved. Unfortunately, gogo's instance >>> command also shows the service is unregistered and controller value as >>> false. >>> >>> I am using: >>> >>> @ServiceController >>> private boolean valid = false; >>> >>> but have also tried: >>> >>> @ServiceController(value = false) >>> private boolean valid; >>> >>> Neither changes the outcome. The service remains unregistered and its >>> controller value false. >>> >>> I have successfully used the @ServiceController annotation elsewhere, >>> but not within a @Bind annotated method. Is that the issue? Is the method >>> sandboxed somehow? Is there a better way to achieve my objective of >>> preventing registration of my service until after a field has been bound? >>> >>> Cheers. >>> >> >> >
