I've been putting annotations on my service implementation, not on the implementation class.
It does get tricky ... the order in which interceptors occur. I think, ideally, HiveMind should be able to see an annotation on a service interface, and have that trigger an interceptor factory, without the need for an <interceptor> element. This would imply a configuration point to match annotations to a service interceptor factory. I really don't like the idea of the implementation class "escaping" from the service implementation factory. Further, I think many interesting services will come to exist as just interfaces and annotations, with HiveMind supplying all the implementations. I hope to bring my focus back to HiveMind and Tapestry in a few weeks. On 2/28/06, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > All, > > I really like how Tapestry did the MethodAnnotationEnhancementWorker stuff. > Do you there could be a way for us to do something like this in HiveMInd? > The problem is that we need to know the type of the implementation object, > since most of the time, annotations for stuff like transactions will be > placed on the implementation class, not the interface. > > James > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Howard M. Lewis Ship Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant Creator, Jakarta Tapestry Creator, Jakarta HiveMind Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support and project work. http://howardlewisship.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
