Re: Annotations and Restlet's future

[Tal Liron]

It seems like I'm the only one here working with non-annotated ServerResources right now, so I'd chime in and add that you actually need to override more than method for each REST method as it stands. There's get(), get(variant), post(entity), post(entity, variant), put(entity), put(entity, variant), delete(), delete(variant). Also, all these methods are allowed to throw ResourceExceptions, but annotated handlers cannot. So, it at stands, non-annotated and annotated mode are currently very different. Also, it seems that annotated mode is turned on by default, and that you have to explicitly turn it off in doInit(). I'm sure some of us would prefer this to be the other way around! Or perhaps automatic detection of some sort? -Tal Tim Peierls wrote: On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 4:57 AM, Rob Heittman <rob.heitt...@solertium.com> wrote: ...my only *strong* requirement, that the annotation based solution must remain a voluntary choice and not the only way to get things done.  It should remain possible to achieve whatever annotations can achieve in a non-annotation way.  This allows the basic API outline to work in places where annotations are not available or work differently enough to cause friction (pre-1.5 JVM backports, GWT, API ports to other languages, Scala ...)  It is OK with me if the non-annotation approach requires verbosity or heavy lifting, it just needs to exist. Isn't that currently the case with the 1.2 branch? (Does GWT not support annotations yet? I thought it did.) It would be best if the non-annotation approach used the same terminology as the annotations, and I think that's not the case right now. --tim