-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.7k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
A new and full-featured Injector introspection API (keys, implementations, dependencies, etc.) #29
Comments
From crazyboblee on February 26, 2007 20:04:29 Both sound good to me. Should we also have getTrasitiveDependencies()? Labels: -Type-Defect Type-Enhancement |
From kevinb9n on March 01, 2007 22:06:10 changed summary from "Set<Key> Binding.getDependencies()" Injector.getDependencyGraph() should return a nice DependencyGraph object supporting Summary: Injector.getDependencyGraph() |
From kevinb9n on March 12, 2007 18:29:50 (No comment was entered for this change.) Labels: 1.1 |
From kevinb9n on March 18, 2007 21:16:05 Slight correction: in the general case the depends-on relationship is significant The dependency graph seems to have vertices of two types: Keys and Implementations. * those containing a single instance that was created and provided by the Module None of this has anything whatsoever to do with bindings or more later, dinner's here. |
From kevinb9n on March 18, 2007 23:18:33 Continuing... I missed a category. I think I need to generalize the second bullet, so the complete * those referencing a single instance that was created and provided by the Module The Implementation object also references a Scope. For bullet point #1 there can't It feels wrong now that our Binding object contains a getProvider() method. Within an Injector, the "resolves-to" association between Key and Implementation is We've also discussed the "provides" association, which is from Implementation to Now finally we have the long-awaited "depends on" association! This is from Now all we need to do is define an interface exposing all this information, and then |
From kevinb9n on March 19, 2007 01:36:50 Here is some crap. public interface Implementation<T> { enum ProvisionStrategy { ProvisionStrategy getProvisionStrategy(); // Only the right method for the provision strategy will work; the others Scope getScope(); public interface Dependency<T> { This is a straw man. pls dissect and discuss. btw my intention is for issue 11 to be implemented atop this API. I also think some Summary: A new and full-featured Injector introspection API (keys, implementations, dependencies, etc.) |
From kevinb9n on March 19, 2007 01:39:49 Implementation could easily have getProvider() and getInstance() methods. It is |
From kevinb9n on April 29, 2007 11:37:54 too big for 1.1 :( Labels: -1.1 |
From kevinb9n on May 31, 2007 14:23:36 I have iterated on the API design a little and have checked it in... I won't say the Bob is insistent that this can be a simple extension of the existing "Binding" API. I'm optimistically re-tagging this for 1.1 because we may have an intern interested Labels: 1.1 |
From limpbizkit on May 29, 2008 23:51:54 (No comment was entered for this change.) Labels: -1.1 Milestone-Release2.0 |
From limpbizkit on August 02, 2008 16:04:35 Done. Elements provides full injector information. Status: Fixed |
From kevinb9n on February 26, 2007 22:12:58
To support tools, e.g. graph-drawing. And what about the inverse,
Set<Binding> getDependents(Key) (in Container?)
Original issue: http://code.google.com/p/google-guice/issues/detail?id=29
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: