Hello Christian;
The improvements you are proposing would require a major version bump since
it's an incompatible API change. But I personally like what you are
suggesting, and I could quickly do it in the upcoming Dependency Manager
4.0.0, which is a new major version.
But before, I need to know if Marcel is agree to go ahead with all this; so
for the moment, may be you can just create a Jira issue, and let's wait for
Marcel to see if he's OK.
Just one remark: the setters can be easily removed, however I think we
can't manage to make the "component()" method automatically add the
Component to the DependencyManager, because technically; when you add a
Component to a DependencyManager, the Component is actually *activated*,
and at this point, all the necessary dependencies have to be already in
place.
So, the only possible improvement I'm thinking about for now could have the
form of this:
public void init(BundleContext context, DependencyManager manager)
throws Exception {
component()
.implementation(DataGenerator.class)
.add(serviceDependency(Store.class).required())
.add(serviceDependency(LogService.class))
.addTo(manager);
}
(notice the addTo method at the end of the sample above, which could just
add the fully built component to the DependencyManager "manager" object).
but I propose you first create the Jira issue and see what Marcel thinks.
I will possible add more suggestions in your Jira issue once you will have
created it (like also using a builder pattern for the aspects/adapters:
this would allow to reduce the number of method signatures for the
createAdapter/createAspect methods).
kind regards (and thanks for proposing to improve Dependency Manager :-))
/Pierre
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Christian Schneider <
[email protected]> wrote:
> I wonder if the DependencyManager API could be made a bit more fluent.
> Technically it already uses the fluent builder pattern
> but all the builder verbs still look a lot like traditional setters.
>
> I know what I propose is mostly syntactic sugar but I think the result
> looks more readable and crisp. See below for some ideas.
>
> Christian
>
> ----
>
> This is from samples.dependonservice:
> public void init(BundleContext context, DependencyManager manager)
> throws Exception {
> manager.add(createComponent()
> .setImplementation(DataGenerator.class)
> .add(createServiceDependency()
> .setService(Store.class)
> .setRequired(true)
> )
> .add(createServiceDependency()
> .setService(LogService.class)
> .setRequired(false)
> )
> );
> }
>
> Why not make it look like this:
> public void init(BundleContext context, DependencyManager manager)
> throws Exception {
> component()
> .implementation(DataGenerator.class)
> .add(serviceDependency(Store.class).required())
> .add(serviceDependency(LogService.class))
> );
> );
> }
>
> component() could create and add the component.
>
> Or for configuration:
> public void init(BundleContext context, DependencyManager manager)
> throws Exception {
> manager.add(createComponent()
> .setImplementation(Task.class)
> .add(createConfigurationDependency()
> .setPid("config.pid")
> // The following is optional and allows to display our
> configuration from webconsole
> .setHeading("Task Configuration")
> .setDescription("Configuration for the Task Service")
> .add(createPropertyMetaData()
> .setCardinality(0)
> .setType(String.class)
> .setHeading("Task Interval")
> .setDescription("Declare here the interval used to
> trigger the Task")
> .setDefaults(new String[] {"10"})
> .setId("interval"))));
> }
>
> could be:
> public void init(BundleContext context, DependencyManager manager)
> throws Exception {
> component().implementation(Task.class)
> .configuration("config.pid")
> .add(meta("Task Configuration)
> .description("Configuration for the Task Service")
> .add(property("interval")
> .cardinality(0)
> .type(String.class)
> .heading("Task Interval")
> .description("Declare here the interval used
> to trigger the Task")
> .default("10"))
> }
>
> --
> Christian Schneider
> http://www.liquid-reality.de
>
> Open Source Architect
> http://www.talend.com
>
>
