Tim Peierls wrote: > Actually, it's worse than that: Even with a latch, the Guice internals > are so aggressively single-threaded that this approach doesn't work at > all -- the trivial demonstration only works because of the uninjected > custom provider. What a shame. > > Sorry if I got any hopes up. :-( > > --tim
Thanks, Tim. You did get my hopes up, but that's ok; this year's disappointments are next year's shiny new technologies. Do you have an opinion on Jesse's proposed solution, the one involving Guava? I don't yet know enough about Guice's internals to know whether your discovery means that his approach would also founder on the same rocks you uncovered. Thanks, William -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "google-guice" group. To post to this group, send email to google-gu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-guice+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-guice?hl=.
