We definitely want something like this in WeldX.
However I would argue we should follow the design of interceptors much more
closely.
1) The aroundInvoke method should take an InvocationContext, returning null for
getTarget (what is the reason for passing the proxy into the method in the
design below)?
2) Drop the interface implementation requirement, and use the @AroundInvoke
annotation
3) Add an annotation used to find the handlers e.g. @ServiceHandler
4) Add a meta-annotation @ServiceBinding(QueryInvocationHandler.class)
@interface QueryService {}
WDYT?
On 28 Jun 2010, at 08:54, Stuart Douglas wrote:
> After some discussions with Walter White I have added some experimental code
> to weld extensions to enable the automatic proxying of interfaces.
>
> To demonstrate how this works, here is a sample:
>
> @AutoProxy(QueryInvocationHandler.class)
> public interface QueryService<T> {};
>
> public interface UserQuery extends QueryService<User>
> {
>
> @Query("select u from user u where u.username=:1")
> public User findUserByUsername(String username);
>
> }
>
> public class QueryInvocationHandler implements InvocationHandler
> {
>
> @Inject EntityManager entityManager;
>
> public Object invoke(Object proxy, Method method, Object[] args)
> throws Throwable
> {
> //run the query based on the annotations on the method
> }
>
> }
>
> Any interface that extends QueryService will be automatically proxied by the
> container, using the InvocationHander specified in the @AutoProxy annotation.
> This proxy is registered as a bean, and if any qualifiers are present on the
> Interface being proxied these are added to the bean. It is also possible to
> inject into the InvocationHandler.
> I also plan to make @AutoProxy a meta annotation, so the above could also be
> represented as:
>
>
> @AutoProxy(QueryInvocationHandler.class)
> public @interface QueryService{}
>
> @QueryService
> public interface UserQuery
> {
>
> @Query("select u from user u where u.username=:1")
> public User findUserByUsername(String username);
>
> }
>
> Does all this sound ok, or does it not have a strong enough use case to
> include it in Weld Extensions?
>
> Stuart
_______________________________________________
seam-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev
