Thanks Howard. So I need to create something like a PrototypeServiceModelFactory extending BaseLocatable and implementing ServiceModelFactory. Is it correct?


From: Howard Lewis Ship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Howard Lewis Ship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Service instanciation
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 07:43:26 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: from mail.apache.org ([209.237.227.199]) by mc6-f10.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Wed, 24 Nov 2004 04:45:03 -0800
Received: (qmail 12127 invoked by uid 500); 24 Nov 2004 12:44:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 12083 invoked by uid 99); 24 Nov 2004 12:44:59 -0000
Received: pass (hermes.apache.org: domain of [EMAIL PROTECTED] designates 64.233.184.199 as permitted sender)
Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (HELO wproxy.gmail.com) (64.233.184.199) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Wed, 24 Nov 2004 04:44:54 -0800
Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 69so695391wra for <[email protected]>; Wed, 24 Nov 2004 04:44:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.54.41.63 with SMTP id o63mr597796wro; Wed, 24 Nov 2004 04:43:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.54.31.73 with HTTP; Wed, 24 Nov 2004 04:43:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jFkpV2PQp+8YPopxxuEihLC
Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
list-help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
list-unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
list-post: <mailto:[email protected]>
Delivered-To: mailing list [email protected]
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0tests=RCVD_BY_IP,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=o4BxoNY2nyO2QxJWgauemP3HIicgAmh5rKeqdr6f0YnOTVS9B8T5Onp7iX6pvmS8QfYZbeqqq3GHA/wBgPrKa1CjqlsMKUv5CHD9WAIjZ6A4jszoz6T8jk8hnyxA8po0mh3X724LPiUrp+JQMi2VsDGBrNcClQV4Obf5CRTE/yc=
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Virus-Checked: Checked
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Nov 2004 12:45:05.0340 (UTC) FILETIME=[6C26FFC0:01C4D223]


Or build your own prototype service factory!  It something that will
be added in 1.1 (if someone adds a JIRA issue, hint) but can be added
by anyone even to 1.0 ... one of the things I love about HiveMind!


On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 10:13:55 +0100, Stephane Louet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, I guess I'll go back to my homegrown POJO factory then :-(
>
> >From: "Hensley, Richard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: [email protected],[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: RE: Service instanciation
> >Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 16:37:52 -0500
> >MIME-Version: 1.0
> >Received: from mail1.mckhboc.com ([208.147.67.98]) by mc7-f34.hotmail.com
> >with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6824); Tue, 23 Nov 2004 13:44:57 -0800
> >Received: from 139.177.6.216 by mail1.mckhboc.com with ESMTP (Outbound
> >Mail1 SMTP Relay (MMS v5.6.1)); Tue, 23 Nov 2004 13:38:05 -0800
> >Received: by smtpout.hboc.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id
> ><WLSTW2KD>; Tue, 23 Nov 2004 16:36:42 -0500
> >Received: from atlexc91nthub.hboc.com (ims2.mckesson.com [139.177.6.115] )
> >by atlexcsmtpa.hboc.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service
> >Version 5.5.2657.72) id WLSTW2J5; Tue, 23 Nov 2004 16:36:37 -0500
> >Received: by ims2.mckesson.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id
> ><XNWLJQGJ>; Tue, 23 Nov 2004 16:39:48 -0500
> >X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jG1z8iUJ+kGbC3GP2QyxI2N
> >X-Server-Uuid: E618535E-AE39-475D-9091-BC1AF22CB2F2
> >X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72)
> >X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72)
> >X-WSS-ID: 6DBD723723C3091941-01-01
> >Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Nov 2004 21:44:57.0093 (UTC)
> >FILETIME=[ACBA8350:01C4D1A5]
>
>
> >
> >Stefano,
> >
> >Threaded means that you get a new instance for each thread, not each time
> >you call getService(). I'm not sure how to configure HiveMind to do what
> >you
> >want.
> >
> >Richard
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Stephane Louet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 1:26 PM
> >To: [email protected]
> >Subject: Service instanciation
> >
> >I have a newbie question for you guys. I have declared a service point that
> >looks like below:
> >
> ><service-point id="AttrDef" interface="mypackage.attr.AttrDef">
> > <invoke-factory model="threaded">
> > <construct class="mypackage.attr.impl.AttrDefImpl"/>
> > </invoke-factory>
> > <interceptor service-id="hivemind.LoggingInterceptor"/>
> ></service-point>
> >
> >I have used "threaded" because I want a new instance of AttrDefImpl every
> >time I do a .getService( AttrDef.class ). But if I do something like:
> >
> >AttrDef attrDef1 = (AttrDef)registry.getService( AttrDef.class );
> >attrDef1.setName( "1" );
> >
> >AttrDef attrDef2 = (AttrDef)registry.getService( AttrDef.class );
> >attrDef2.setName( "2" );
> >
> >System.out.println( "attrDef1=" + attrDef1.getName() + ", attrDef2=" +
> >attrDef2.getName() );
> >
> >I basically get the following attrDef1=2, attrDef2=2. It looks like
> >.getService() returns the same element (a singleton?) every time. I believe
> >I am missing something here ;-)
> >
> >Any help appreciated,
> >Stefano
> >
> >
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >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]
>
>



-- Howard M. Lewis Ship Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant Creator, Jakarta Tapestry Creator, Jakarta HiveMind http://howardlewisship.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]



Reply via email to