Carlos Sanchez wrote:
> anyone?
>
> On 7/20/06, Carlos Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I'm just wondering what people think about protected empty constructor
>> so I can extend that classes instead of write wrappers.
>>
>>
Hi Carlos
I am not a big fan of this idea. It's still compromising the project's
source code for the sake of a suboptimal IoC container. Indeed I'm not
entirely sure what it will buy you, as you still need to subclass in
order to utilise the protected no-argument constructor. Thus, you could
instead isolate the changes using bytecode manipulation, as mentioned in
an off-list email. You could write a general purpose no-argument utility
class which contained a method such as:
public static Object instantiateWithGeneratedNoArgConstructor(Class)
Additional utility methods could be added to the utility class in order
to obtain access to other protected fields that your new wrapper class
might require. What I'm essentially proposing is you write wrapper
classes instead of subclassing, as the latter requires no-argument
constructors whereas the former does not and you still end up with one
additional class per Acegi Security class either way.
I still think that using the planned 1.1.0's namespace support with a
private Spring beans dependency is the optimal long-term approach anyway.
Cheers
Ben
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Home: http://acegisecurity.org
Acegisecurity-developer mailing list
Acegisecurity-developer@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/acegisecurity-developer
