tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-637417304187784899.post1732682428667693191..comments2024-01-04T09:04:42.121+00:00Comments on James Strachan's Blog: thoughts on the new @Inject JSRJames Strachanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12591119339035350067noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-637417304187784899.post-24133822975742812842009-05-12T03:32:00.000+00:002009-05-12T03:32:00.000+00:00SUN's Jersey has an @Inject annotation & i...SUN's Jersey has an @Inject annotation & it's not even a DI framework!Xanana Gusmaohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11855273228730031844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-637417304187784899.post-26502996676209475702009-05-10T13:24:00.000+00:002009-05-10T13:24:00.000+00:00Actually, don't worry about that comment of mine. ...Actually, don't worry about that comment of mine. :-) <br /><br />I went and had a closer look at Guice and I can see the benefit of marking items that are injectable. I suppose to answer my own question JSR-299 saves a lot of effort in the wiring side of things. <br /><br />I found this video a great intro:<br /><br />http://crazybob.org/2007/06/introduction-to-guice-video-redux.html<br /><br />I agree with you that the scope of the JSR should be just on the established parts of IoC.Christopherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06860404627954267472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-637417304187784899.post-41398090427669308712009-05-10T12:51:00.000+00:002009-05-10T12:51:00.000+00:00At the risk of appearing thick, I don't get it. I ...At the risk of appearing thick, I don't get it. I mean I just don't get the need for identifying the parts of my beans that are injectable. Why is it not good enough that my classes are bean-conforming (public getters/setters, zero-arg ctors etc.)?<br /><br />I'm sure I'm just missing something here and of course I'm happy to be enlightened. :-)Christopherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06860404627954267472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-637417304187784899.post-50792692581285714042009-05-09T02:45:00.000+00:002009-05-09T02:45:00.000+00:00James,
I see @Inject as a subset of 299. Since th...James,<br /><br />I see @Inject as a subset of 299. Since that came first and the JSR proposal is more mature, it's @Inject burden to follow 299, not the other way around.<br /><br />I agree 299 tries to push a lot of things - it would be better if were modular. But its goal was not providing DI per se, but acting as a glue between JSF, WS, JPA, etc.Cloves J. G. dehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14815910723277901228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-637417304187784899.post-77852798389454102442009-05-08T18:30:00.000+00:002009-05-08T18:30:00.000+00:00I don't like the @Inject action name. I better pre...I don't like the @Inject action name. I better prefer a role name may be @InjectedColaborator or @InjectionPointHernan Parrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12432376017398680542noreply@blogger.com