2008/11/26 Johan Haleby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I didn't mean that they used aspectj for proxying but rather suggesting > that aspectj could be used *instead* of proxying to achieve the same > results.
exactly - I think the wires got crossed somewhere between your replies to the other thread and the start of this one We discussed earlier that e.g. guice-warp couldn't support final or private > methods for starting transacation because it used CGLib, but using a > delegating approach *instead *of using a proxy could solve the problem > (which you seem to imply as well if I'm not misstaken). But whether this is > applicable to Guice is another question. > the question came up here relating to Guice's use of CGLIB for AOP/proxy support ... Gili was wondering whether Guice could use class redefinition to implement proxying (ie. still behaving as a proxy) - which I don't think it could, because of classloading visibility - but users could decide to weave classes externally using aspects and then use Guice to inject them later, which is basically what Spring does with @Configurable I think it would be very cool if Guice could support something similar as > Springs AOP support for injection. Actually I'd like to create a spike for > this if I get some time over, I've been needing this kind of stuff myself. > it's certainly possible and shouldn't require any changes to Guice core - you'd need to create an extension library, like the small Spring-AspectJ library under Spring-AOP, which can find instances and ask Guice to inject them > /Johan -- Cheers, Stuart --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "google-guice" group. To post to this group, send email to google-guice@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-guice?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
