> Now we've changed our collective mind again and are now using a factory > class to have ObjectName instead of String. Since the factory is > jboss-specific I imagine noone wants the standard mbean.j file to include > a > reference to it. > > So... > > Is the best way to deal with this to make a jboss-standard-mbean.j in > vendor with this new convention? > > Should I also write a jboss subtask of jmxDoclet to use this template?
Almost all code generator templates have custom-blabla.j merge points. So if you add something vendor-specific to a standard template then instead of adding it to the standard template use the merge points to add your vendor-specific stuff. I haven't looked at jmx stuff but dataobject.j as an example provides custom-dataobject.j merge point, so if you want to add say a toXml method then use standard template but create a custom-dataobject.j and put it in where mergeDir parameter points to. XDoclet will pick it and merge in. > I've wondered about generating dynamic mbeans from annotated code. When I > write a dynamic mbean by hand, I put the invoke and metadata methods in > the > class itself. Is there any way to add code to an existing file and > compile > the modified file rather than the original? Another possibility is to > have > the dynamic mbean extend the original class, so if modifying the original > file is too hard I could do that instead. Not currently but will be possible with xjavadocs later. We'll make it general too. Ara. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Xdoclet-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xdoclet-devel
