Re: [picocontainer-dev] Preferring Parameter names.....

Folks,

>
> You still have the problem that parameter names have no scope for  
> the component:
>
> class JDBCService {
> 	JDBCService(URL endpoint, String username, String password);
> }
>
> class SOAPService {
> 	SOAPService(URL endpoint, String username, String password);
> }
>

So Guice has 'binding annotations' for this.  It is very verbose.

See http://blog.decaresystems.ie/index.php/2007/06/14/juicy-code-with- 
google-guice-part-4/ - search in page for 'binding annotations will  
help us'.

I don't like it, but think we should do it too :-(

I do like the simplicity and terseness of the parameter-name way  
we're currently doing, but Jorg highlights a shortcoming that the  
binding-annotations route does not have.

More customizable parameter name use

What if we also allow the following syntax :-

     pico.addConfig("jdbc_username", "fred");
     pico.addConfig("soap_username", "wilma");
     // etc
     pico.as(USE_NAMES("jdbc_")).addComponent(JDBCService.class);
     pico.as(USE_NAMES("soap_")).addComponent(SOAPService.class);

That's about an hour's work on the current codebase.

An alternative using Parameter objects

     pico.addComponent(JDBCService.class);

or ..

     pico.with(new NamedParameter("jdbc_username"), new NamedParameter 
("jdbc_password")).addComponent(JDBCService.class);

... where with is also a varargs Parameter array thing and functions  
like 'as' ... on the next addComponent(..) only.


- Paul