Re: [picocontainer-dev] Nano2 (baby steps - work in progress) 'config' based entries in component tree.

Nice thinking.

Might break lots of our tests that rely on String as a test component.

You also introduce...

   * property
   * parameter

... in additional to my ...

   * config
   * const

as we think about the name for this non-component idea.

- Paul


On May 18, 2007, at 2:07 AM, Jörg Schaible wrote:

> Paul Hammant wrote:
>
>> I agree that it could be subject to taste.
>>
>> It is just as viable for a composition script to pull config vars  
>> from:
>>
>>    * xml
>>    * a properties file
>>    * an #include concept for Groovy/JRuby
>>
>> - Paul
>
> This property/component problem also always itched me. DI cannot  
> really
> distinguish between those two. Maybe we should introduce a concept  
> for the
> dependency resolution, which types should be handled as (named)  
> parameter
> and which as component.
>
> Classic parmeter types are primitives and the ones of java.lang,  
> but you may
> also add types like URL, URI, UUID, ...
>
> Currently those two are encapsulated by ConstantParameter and
> ComponentParameter, but maybe we should treat them more different.  
> Some
> kind of individual configuration for the components.
>
> - Jörg
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this list please visit:
>
>     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email