[cc: google-gin group]
Phil,
to make it clearer on the GIN side, how about a GinScope annotation taking
as value a scope annotation, and having GIN use that scope annotation when
JIT-binding to the GWT.create() call?
I.e.
@GinScope(@Singleton)
public interface MyRequestFactory extends
Thanks Thomas for the idea. It's an excellent one and we should
definitely pursue it in gin.
However, I'd like to probe the Guice developers on this a little more
as I feel that the ability to annotate abstract types with a scope
could be useful in other contexts as well. For example I'm using
All,
Guice 3.0 is coming soon. There's a few bugs posted against RC2 that I'd
like to check out, a potential fix for issue 288 (about
FinalizableReferenceQueue) in the works that would avoid the need for a new
thread entirely, and some minor changes to the code to improve performance
that need
Congrats for your new apartment and break a leg for the internet connection ;)
I hope #409, #546 (I provided a small patch) and #574 (Stuart provided
a patch for it!) will be included in the next release :P
All the best,
Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://www.99soft.org/
On
Thanks for the Good work Sam and Guice team. Am eagerly waiting to user
Guice3 on a new project that am starting next month.
Kind regards.
Josh.
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 9:00 PM, Simone Tripodi simonetrip...@apache.orgwrote:
Congrats for your new apartment and break a leg for the internet
On Jan 27, 1:43 am, PhilBeaudoin philippe.beaud...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
Gin has a great feature where it will GWT.create() an interface if it
is not explicitly bound. However, if you want the GWT.create() call to
occur just once then you need to bind the interface as a singleton.
Often
A couple of things:
1) MyInterface.class could actually be MyAbstractClass.class
2) The instance returned by GWT.create is not necessarily stateless.
So, even though both objects are equal upon creation, you can
manipulate them afterward. As a result, you don't want both calls to
GWT.create to
I've opened (finally) an issue with a testcase for this:
http://code.google.com/p/google-guice/issues/detail?id=594
http://code.google.com/p/google-guice/issues/detail?id=594keep up your
amazing job with guice!
jordi
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 6:41 PM, Sam Berlin sber...@gmail.com wrote:
Ya..
ServletModule currently accepts any string for serve(...) and filter(...),
but AFAIK, only strings with a leading '/' or '*' are useful.
The module should probably throw an error at configureServlets() time if an
invalid pattern/path is given. I think this could be done by checking for
leading
Hi,
this is more a conceptual questions to learn whether what I'm thinking
about actually makes sense. I'd be grateful for some hints on this.
I'm currently redesigning an Eclipse plugin that makes use of a lot of
differently scope services. Some of these services are have workspace
scope, i.e.,
Comment #1 on issue 452 by mbur...@gmail.com: Make requestStaticInjection
work for TypeListeners
http://code.google.com/p/google-guice/issues/detail?id=452
This would help Android developers using guice.
RoboGuice allows developers to inject views and resources into their
Android
Comment by martin.k...@gmail.com:
I'm getting an error:
We're sorry, but [my@gmail.address] does not have access to this document.
For more information:
http://code.google.com/p/google-guice/wiki/UserGuide
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
All,
Guice 3.0 is coming soon. There's a few bugs posted against RC2 that I'd
like to check out, a potential fix for issue 288 (about
FinalizableReferenceQueue) in the works that would avoid the need for a new
thread entirely, and some minor changes to the code to improve performance
that need
Comment #1 on issue 571 by ffa...@google.com: ServletModule needs better
error msg if calling serve(..) or filter(..) outside of configureServlets
http://code.google.com/p/google-guice/issues/detail?id=571
i actually hit this in the 2.0 = 3.0 migration. fact is, the same case
exists for
Status: New
Owner:
New issue 594 by jordi.gerona.castello: Cannot use optimized @Assisted
provider outside the scope of the constructor.
http://code.google.com/p/google-guice/issues/detail?id=594
I'm using Guice-rc2 and I found this error using Assisted Inject... but the
strange thing
Comment #1 on issue 594 by jordi.gerona.castello: Cannot use optimized
@Assisted provider outside the scope of the constructor.
http://code.google.com/p/google-guice/issues/detail?id=594
here's the correct file
Attachments:
assisted-error.zip 10.0 KB
--
You received this message
Comment #42 on issue 288 by Andrei.Pozolotin: FinalizableReferenceQueue
still leaks
http://code.google.com/p/google-guice/issues/detail?id=288
Stuart: thanks for the patch; I vote for this for I need it to terminate
this thread from external container; I hope in final form in guice 3.0 you
Comment #43 on issue 288 by tj.rothw...@gmail.com:
FinalizableReferenceQueue still leaks
http://code.google.com/p/google-guice/issues/detail?id=288
I've been meaning to test again, but haven't had time the last couple of
days. From #41, it looks to do exactly what needs to be done. Thanks
Status: New
Owner:
New issue 595 by cgdec...@gmail.com: PersistModule doesn't bind interceptor
for class-level @Transactional annotation
http://code.google.com/p/google-guice/issues/detail?id=595
I was working on a JDBC implementation of guice-persist and noticed that my
transactional
Comment #1 on issue 595 by cgdec...@gmail.com: PersistModule doesn't bind
interceptor for class-level @Transactional annotation
http://code.google.com/p/google-guice/issues/detail?id=595
This is also the reason the two disabled tests in
ClassLevelManagedLocalTransactionsTest would fail (no
20 matches
Mail list logo
