[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote : Though I am starting to suspect that there is no
support for this currently.
You would be wrong. ;-)
I might even be offended as you doubt us. :-)
See constants usage:
-
Ah, I see why it wasn't obvious at first. So does that mean that any bean
which I want to pull constants from has to be managed?
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4193736#4193736
Reply to the post :
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote : So does that mean that any bean which I want to
pull constants from has to be managed?
It's all about beans.
Unless we had special constants treatment,
how else do you expect us to pull stuff from? :-)
But I guess this can be done generic:
- simply add constants
It just seems a little odd - I want to pull a static field so why do I need an
object instance? Unless access-mode=FIELDS implicitly grabs the class
instead?
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4193743#4193743
Reply to the post :
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote : Unless access-mode=FIELDS implicitly grabs the
class instead?
Grabs class how?
We don't have any special static handling (via xml or BMDB).
OO != static. ;-)
And I don't see why we should have any special treatment,
the example I provided you is not a huge penalty.
But
alesj wrote :
| We don't have any special static handling (via xml or BMDB).
|
Apart from constructor::factory.
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4193756#4193756
Reply to the post :
Consider the case where a constructor takes an enum or an enum-like object -
object identity is significant, but there may or may not be a way to get the
value from a factory method. The object would be known publicly only because
it is declared as a public constant. The most obvious
A simpler use case would be constants in an interface. ;-)
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4193793#4193793
Reply to the post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4193793
___
Exactly...
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4193795#4193795
Reply to the post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4193795
___
jboss-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote : The most obvious mechanism to me is a ValueMetaData
that is comprised of a class and a field name.
The most obvious is value-factory:
| bean name=ConstantsProvider
class=org.jboss.demos.ioc.access.ConstantsProvider
| constructor
|
Ah, I get it. One thing though - shouldn't the class be loaded from the
classloader of the deployment? If you have just one ConstantsProvider for all
deployements and it's just using its own classloader, one would think there
might be problems when it is used by another deployment.
View the
Sure.
I never said this was _not_ pseudo code. :-)
But I think you get my drift.
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4193894#4193894
Reply to the post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4193894
...and, I also would need to know the programmatic equivalent as well. Though
I am starting to suspect that there is no support for this currently.
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4193614#4193614
Reply to the post :
13 matches
Mail list logo
