Hi,

Some feedback has come saying that it'd be nice to be able to configure 
externalizers using annotations. Now, in a previous discussion 
(http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/infinispan-dev/2010-December/007047.html) it 
was agreed that for framework developers this is not nice since it makes it 
hard to abstract the Infinispan layer, but end users might be interested in 
using annotations rather than having to implement getId(), getTypeClasses() in 
Externalizer interface - see http://community.jboss.org/docs/DOC-16198 

To be able to support this, @Marshallable annotation that would be used wth 
externalizer implementations would have to be brought back with id and 
typeClasses attributes. That'd make it a 3rd way to define ids, after XML and 
getId() implementations.

Clearly, getId() and getTypeClasses() would be moved to a different interface, 
so that people that chose to use @Marshallable could just provide 
read/writeObject method implementations.

The gain from having end users use @Marshallable is not that great IMO cos we 
don't do annotation scanning, so there would still be a need to register 
externalizers.

Thoughts?
--
Galder Zamarreño
Sr. Software Engineer
Infinispan, JBoss Cache


_______________________________________________
infinispan-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev

Reply via email to