Well, JCP doesn't have proxies that "replace" themselves. It can generate "delegator" proxies that are place-holders. But, subsequent invocations will still have to pass through the proxy in order to delegate to the actual object. The construction of the object can take place at a later time, though. If we really need these proxy types, I'll can see what I can do in JCP.
No, I don't have a release yet. I'm preparing for one. Right now, it's in the commons sandbox (so I can't release), but I don't think I'll get too much grief if I want to promote it to the "commons proper" (especially if something like HiveMind wants to use it). -----Original Message----- From: Achim Hügen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 4:04 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: HiveMind 2.0 Jakarta commons proxy looks good and I would appreciate to reuse a library. We'll get another dependency but loosen the dependency on javassist and cglib. Can we substitute all the advanced proxy stuff that hivemind uses today? Like inner/outer proxies that replace themselves? There is no binary release today isn't it? When could we expect one? Achim Am Fri, 12 May 2006 21:51:35 +0200 schrieb James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > All, > > In HiveMind 2.0, it'd be nice to change some of the API around a bit. > For > instance: > > 1. The registry implementation should be handed a ProxyFactory (like the > one from Jakarta Commons Proxy) in the constructor which allows us to > substitute proxying techniques. Jakarta Commons Proxy already has code > for > this and we should either copy it or use it as a dependency. This would > abstract away all of the proxying logic from our (and users) code. > > 2. The interceptor factories shouldn't be given access to the > "interceptor > stack." They should just have to return an interceptor instance (we > could > create our own interceptor interface or use AOP Alliance's API). > HiveMind > itself will take care of putting the interceptor onto the stack by > creating > an intercepting proxy using the ProxyFactory. After all, don't you find > it > weird that a "factory" doesn't really return anything? This is a really > big > one, IMHO. The Javassist stuff is just too difficult for the everyday > user. > But, they can instantiate an interceptor object quite easily. > > Thoughts? > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
