What would you like to see in the extension registry 2010?
If you have an opinion on how the extension registry can be improved,
please visit:
http://wiki.eclipse.org/Equinox_Extension_Registry_Work
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=248340
and leave your comments!
Oleg,
Great to see typed objects moving into the extension registry!
I am not sure if I fully understand IRegistryObject, therefore the
following might not apply: I would not like my classes having to
implement this platform related interface. Better provide an
(additional) reflection based
In Riena we have a simple approach for injecting extensions into target
objects. This is similar to DI but not for services but for data.
The benefit is that the code dealing with extensions/extension points
has no dependencies to the extension registry.
You may have a look at:
http://wiki.ecl
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 3:19 PM, Oleg Besedin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> What would you like to see in the extension registry 2010?
I just looked at
http://wiki.eclipse.org/Equinox_Extension_Registry_Work_Objects. I
like that you plan to use constructor and setter injection, this has a
lot of
>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
09/26/2008 10:01 AM
Please respond to
Equinox development mailing list
To
"Equinox development mailing list"
cc
Subject
Re: [equinox-dev] Extension registry evolution
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 3:19 PM, Oleg Besedin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 11:32 AM, Mark Rogalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Not to throw a fly in the ointment, but some of the designs being discussed
> would not work on CDC/Foundation 1.1.
Mark, what are you referring to? Being able to use annotations in
client code, for use with dependency
spond to
Equinox development mailing list
To
"Equinox development mailing list"
cc
Subject
Re: [equinox-dev] Extension registry evolution
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 11:32 AM, Mark Rogalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Not to throw a fly in the ointment, but some of the design
The registry itself is already a service. In the past I have written
an executable extension factory that did service lookup to supply the
desired extension object. so the base pieces should be there but it
would be great to make the integration much smoother.
Jeff
Heiko Seeberger wrote:
Thank you for the comments, lots of good points.
=> IRegistryObject <=
> (2) IRegistryObject is odd - can you not split this into two
> interfaces that we would recommend are being used whenever objects
> need to be initialized, or disposed?
Yes, this makes sense, let's split it into IDisposabl
Oleg Besedin wrote:
=> Single context object <=
> I don't like that clients cannot provide more
than just one single
> "context" object.
Good point. I did this for simplicity as having
only
one argument eliminates the need to match constructor arguments. If we
were to suppo
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 2:51 PM, Oleg Besedin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> => Single context object <=
>
>> I don't like that clients cannot provide more than just one single
>> "context" object.
>
> Good point. I did this for simplicity as having only one argument eliminates
> the need to match co
Hi Oleg,
I recently updated the "Riena Getting Started with injecting services
and extensions":
http://wiki.eclipse.org/Riena_Getting_Started_with_injecting_services_and_extensions
Tschüß,
Stefan
Oleg Besedin wrote:
Thank you for the comments, lots of good points.
> In Riena we have a si
12 matches
Mail list logo
