By the way. When using @Configured one has to get AspectJ working if
I'm not mistaken?
I've been messing with it for a while now and it's not going great.
:-/ What I did was install the AJDT plugin for Eclipse and converted
my project to a AspectJ project, then I got stuck. How are you who
have
I skipped the AJDT plugin and am doing LTW (Load-Time Weaving) now, it works.
In my case I added: (It might be of use to someone)
-javaagent:/home/kent/.ivy2/cache/org.springframework/spring-agent/jars/spring-agent-2.5.6.SEC01.jar
To the Server Overview / Open launch configuration /
Hi,
According to the docs [1], it should be enough to add this to your spring
XML configuration file:
context:load-time-weaver/
[1]
http://static.springframework.org/spring/docs/2.5.x/reference/aop.html#aop-aj-ltw
Maarten
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Kent Larsson
Hi,
Thanks for answering. But I tried that and it wasn't enough on my
computer at least. I think the documentation says that it works in
some environments but not all. Using Tomcat 6 I couldn't get it
working without the -javaagent parameter.
I'm writing from memory now so it's probably a little
I try not to design my domain models in such a way
Could you elaborate on this a bit, please?
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 6:19 AM, James Carman
jcar...@carmanconsulting.com wrote:
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 11:36 AM, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com
wrote:
this is why i built
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 4:04 AM, Kent Larsson kent.lars...@gmail.com wrote:
I try not to design my domain models in such a way
Could you elaborate on this a bit, please?
I kind of cheat a bit. When there needs to be something done that
involves multiple domain entities, I usually push that
Ah, interesting. Thanks for elaborating!
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 12:31 PM, James Carman
jcar...@carmanconsulting.com wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 4:04 AM, Kent Larsson kent.lars...@gmail.com wrote:
I try not to design my domain models in such a way
Could you elaborate on this a bit, please?
Hi,
Our current architecture:
---
We're currently using a 3-tier architecture (presentation,
service/business and persistence) consisting of Wicket (+ a little
Spring), Spring and Spring + Hibernate:
Wicket:
Does presentation, we're not inside a transaction / Hibernate session
so all used
In your entities, you don't use @SpringBean. You use @Configurable/@Autowire.
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 9:38 AM, Kent Larsson kent.lars...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Our current architecture:
---
We're currently using a 3-tier architecture (presentation,
service/business and persistence)
No, I mean @Configurable/@Autowired
http://static.springframework.org/spring/docs/2.5.x/api/org/springframework/beans/factory/annotation/Configurable.html
http://static.springframework.org/spring/docs/2.5.x/api/org/springframework/beans/factory/annotation/Autowired.html
With these, you can
Do you have a separation between domain objects and DTO's? It sounds
like you don't (and there is nothing wrong with that), but if you do,
how do you inject the DTO into the entity? In my case each DTO is a
Spring singleton bean.
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 4:17 PM, Will Jaynes w...@jaynes.org wrote:
this is why i built salve.googlecode.com
you can easily hook it into spring and have all your objects (doman
objects or wicket components) injected via @Dependency without
worrying about serialization issues or eager injection - eg if you
load a result set of 1000 hibernate entities that need
Are you talking about DAOs (data access objects) and not DTOs (data
transfer objects)? DTOs are typically not singletons. Nor are they
set up via spring.
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Kent Larsson kent.lars...@gmail.com wrote:
Do you have a separation between domain objects and DTO's? It
Oops! Yes I'm talking about DAO's, not DTO's as I wrote. I guess I
shouldn't write acronyms after a long work day. ;-) Thanks for
spotting it!
Best regards, Kent
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 6:07 PM, James Carman
jcar...@carmanconsulting.com wrote:
Are you talking about DAOs (data access objects)
Nice! I think Salve looks great! And it solves more than this problem,
I like the design by contract module too as it allows me to validate
parameters in a bit more declarative way.
Do you think Salve is ready to be used in production? I'm a bit
concerned by Although already usable, Salve is
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Kent Larsson kent.lars...@gmail.com wrote:
Nice! I think Salve looks great! And it solves more than this problem,
I like the design by contract module too as it allows me to validate
parameters in a bit more declarative way.
Do you think Salve is ready to be
and are @SpringBean's compatible with
the
solution in Spring 2.0 vs. the Anemic Domain Model?
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Kent Larsson
kent.lars...@gmail.com
wrote:
Nice! I think Salve looks great! And it solves more than this
problem,
I like the design by contract module too as it allows
clean
out the ORM's object cache instead.
-Original Message-
From: Igor Vaynberg [mailto:igor.vaynb...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, 29 May 2009 3:38 AM
To: users@wicket.apache.org
Subject: Re: Anemic domain model and are @SpringBean's compatible with
the
solution in Spring 2.0 vs
and are @SpringBean's compatible
with
the
solution in Spring 2.0 vs. the Anemic Domain Model?
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Kent Larsson
kent.lars...@gmail.com
wrote:
Nice! I think Salve looks great! And it solves more than this
problem,
I like the design by contract module too
and are @SpringBean's compatible
with
the
solution in Spring 2.0 vs. the Anemic Domain Model?
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Kent Larsson
kent.lars...@gmail.com
wrote:
Nice! I think Salve looks great! And it solves more than this
problem,
I like the design by contract module too as it allows me
]
Sent: Friday, 29 May 2009 11:43 AM
To: users@wicket.apache.org
Subject: Re: Anemic domain model and are @SpringBean's compatible with
the
solution in Spring 2.0 vs. the Anemic Domain Model?
well, this is why salve removes the dependency field to at least help
with those.
other
[mailto:igor.vaynb...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, 29 May 2009 11:43 AM
To: users@wicket.apache.org
Subject: Re: Anemic domain model and are @SpringBean's compatible with
the
solution in Spring 2.0 vs. the Anemic Domain Model?
well, this is why salve removes the dependency field to at least help
becomes
too
low?
Chris
-Original Message-
From: Igor Vaynberg [mailto:igor.vaynb...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, 29 May 2009 11:43 AM
To: users@wicket.apache.org
Subject: Re: Anemic domain model and are @SpringBean's compatible
with
the
solution in Spring 2.0 vs. the Anemic
-Original Message-
From: Igor Vaynberg [mailto:igor.vaynb...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, 29 May 2009 11:43 AM
To: users@wicket.apache.org
Subject: Re: Anemic domain model and are @SpringBean's compatible
with
the
solution in Spring 2.0 vs. the Anemic Domain Model?
well
-Original Message-
From: Igor Vaynberg [mailto:igor.vaynb...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, 29 May 2009 11:43 AM
To: users@wicket.apache.org
Subject: Re: Anemic domain model and are @SpringBean's
compatible
with
the
solution in Spring 2.0 vs. the Anemic Domain Model?
well
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 11:36 AM, Igor Vaynberg igor.vaynb...@gmail.com wrote:
this is why i built salve.googlecode.com
you can easily hook it into spring and have all your objects (doman
objects or wicket components) injected via @Dependency without
worrying about serialization issues or
26 matches
Mail list logo
