[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [sca-j] [NEW ISSUE] Java C&I Constrctor Examples are incorrect
Vamsi,
I'm not sure it's necessary to say specifically that an unannotated
implementation needs to have a no-argument constructor, as this
is implied by other normative statements. However, it wouldn't do
any harm to have a non-normative comment somewhere mentioning it.
Simon
Mike Edwards wrote:
>
> Vamsi,
>
> I think this misses the point.
>
> It does not matter whether the implementation code has any @Reference or
> @Property annotations, what
> does matter is that the class must have a constructor that the SCA
> runtime can invoke to create an instance
> of the class. That constructor can be no-arg, or it can have arguments
> BUT if it does have arguments then
> they MUST all be annotated with either @Reference or @Property.
>
> What I'm getting at is that the rule here is about the constructors
> themselves, not about the rest of the class.
>
>
> Yours, Mike.
>
> Strategist - Emerging Technologies, SCA & SDO.
> Co Chair OASIS SCA Assembly TC.
> IBM Hursley Park, Mail Point 146, Winchester, SO21 2JN, Great Britain.
> Phone & FAX: +44-1962-818014 Mobile: +44-7802-467431
> Email: mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com
>
>
> From: C Vamsi <vamsic007@in.ibm.com>
> To: OASIS Java <sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Date: 17/03/2009 13:29
> Subject: Re: [sca-j] [NEW ISSUE] Java C&I Constrctor Examples are incorrect
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> Simon,
>
> What happens if there is no no-argument constructor? I see that it is
> implicit from the starting sentence in section 5, "A Java implementation
> class MUST provide a public or protected constructor that can be used by
> the SCA runtime to create the implementation instance. [JCI50001]" plus the
> selection algorithm. I feel it would be useful to explicitly state that an
> implementation with no @Reference or @Property annotations should have a
> public or protected no-argument constructor.
>
> ++Vamsi
> Apache Tuscany Committer http://tuscany.apache.org
> <http://tuscany.apache.org/>
> Apache Geronimo Committer and Member of PMC http://geronimo.apache.org
> <http://geronimo.apache.org/>
>
>
>
>
> Simon Nash
> <oasis@cjnash.com
> > To
> OASIS Java
> 17/03/2009 15:38 <sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org>
> cc
>
> Subject
> Re: [sca-j] [NEW ISSUE] Java C&I
> Constrctor Examples are incorrect
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Vamsi,
> This is in Chapter 5 (Implementation Instance Creation) of JavaCI.
> Step 3 of the constructor selection algorithm allows for this case.
>
> Simon
>
> C Vamsi wrote:
> > Hi Simon,
> >
> > I do not recall coming across the requirement, "allows unannotated
> > implementations if they have a no-parameter constructor" made clear in
> the
> > current spec. To speed things up, can you please point me to the
> > section/paragraph?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > ++Vamsi
> > Apache Tuscany Committer http://tuscany.apache.org
> <http://tuscany.apache.org/>
> > Apache Geronimo Committer and Member of PMC
> http://geronimo.apache.org <http://geronimo.apache.org/>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Simon Nash
> > <oasis@cjnash.com
> > >
> To
> > OASIS Java
> > 09/03/2009 19:43 <sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org>
> >
> cc
> >
> >
> Subject
> > Re: [sca-j] [NEW ISSUE] Java C&I
> > Constrctor Examples are incorrect
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Vamsi,
> > I agree that it's unfortunate that constructor injection isn't
> > possible for properties and references of unnanotated implementations.
> > This is because it's not possible to infer the name of a property
> > or reference that appears as a constructor parameter.
> >
> > I'm not sure why you think a new issue is needed. The current spec
> > allows unannotated implementations if they have a no-parameter
> constructor.
> > Do you think there is some way to improve on this?
> >
> > Simon
> >
> > C Vamsi wrote:
> >> Simon,
> >>
> >> When JAVA-39 was raised, I have not thought about the constructors. Now
> >> that we require all parameters of a constructor annotated with a
> >> @Constructor annotation to have either a @Property or a @Reference
> >> annotation (JCA90003 in CAA spec), we need to revisit these examples.
> >> Appears like we have to require an unannotated implementation (i.e., one
> >> with no @Property or @Referene annotations) to have a constructor with
> no
> >> parameters. I guess it will call for a new issue!!
> >>
> >> ++Vamsi
> >> Apache Tuscany Committer http://tuscany.apache.org
> <http://tuscany.apache.org/>
> >> Apache Geronimo Committer and Member of PMC
> http://geronimo.apache.org <http://geronimo.apache.org/>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Simon Nash
> >> <oasis@cjnash.com
> >> >
> > To
> >> OASIS Java
> >> 27/02/2009 20:40 <sca-j@lists.oasis-open.org>
> >>
> > cc
> >>
> > Subject
> >> Re: [sca-j] [NEW ISSUE] Java C&I
> >> Constrctor Examples are incorrect
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I believe this is a duplicate of issue JAVA-39. However, I'd like
> >> to understand the reason for the assertion that the examples noted as
> >> "does not unambiguously identify all property and reference values"
> >> are incorrect.
> >>
> >> Simon
> >>
> >> Mike Edwards wrote:
> >>> Raiser: Mike Edwards
> >>>
> >>> Target: sca-javaci-1.1-spec-wd03.pdf
> >>>
> >>> Description:
> >>>
> >>> The constructor examples in section 5 contain errors that make some of
> >>> them illegal and they must be fixed.
> >>>
> >>> /** Simple class taking a single property value */
> >>>
> >>> public class Impl1 {
> >>>
> >>> String someProperty;
> >>>
> >>> public Impl1(String propval) {...}
> >>>
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> *<mje> This one does not "unambiguously identify all property and
> >>> reference values"</mje>*
> >>>
> >>> /** Simple class taking a property and reference in the constructor;
> >>>
> >>> * The values are not injected into the fields.
> >>>
> >>> *//
> >>>
> >>> public class Impl2 {
> >>>
> >>> public String someProperty;
> >>>
> >>> public SomeService someReference;
> >>>
> >>> public Impl2(String a, SomeService b) {...}
> >>>
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> *<mje> This one does not "unambiguously identify all property and
> >>> reference values"</mje>*
> >>>
> >>> /** Class declaring a named property and reference through the
> >>> constructor */
> >>>
> >>> public class Impl3 {
> >>>
> >>> @Constructor({"someProperty", "someReference"})
> >>>
> >>> public Impl3(String a, SomeService b) {...}
> >>>
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> *<mje>@Constructor annotation has no such attributes (see [JAVACAA])
> >>> </mje>*
> >>>
> >>> /** Class declaring a named property and reference through parameters
> */
> >>>
> >>> public class Impl3b {
> >>>
> >>> public Impl3b(
> >>>
> >>> @Property("someProperty") String a,
> >>>
> >>> @Reference("someReference) SomeService b
> >>>
> >>> ) {...}
> >>>
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> *<mje>This one is OK</mje>*
> >>>
> >>> /** Additional property set through a method */
> >>>
> >>> public class Impl4 {
> >>>
> >>> public String someProperty;
> >>>
> >>> public SomeService someReference;
> >>>
> >>> public Impl2(String a, SomeService b) {...}
> >>>
> >>> @Property public void setAnotherProperty(int x) {...}
> >>>
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> *<mje> This one does not "unambiguously identify all property and
> >>> reference values"</mje>*
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Proposal:
> >>>
> >>> Replace the examples with the following ones:
> >>>
> >>> /** Constructor declared using @Constructor annotation */
> >>>
> >>> public class Impl1 {
> >>>
> >>> private String someProperty;
> >>>
> >>> @Constructor
> >>>
> >>> public Impl1( @Property("someProperty") String propval ) {...}
> >>>
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> /** Declared constructor unambiguously identifying all Property and
> >>> Reference values */
> >>>
> >>> public class Impl2 {
> >>>
> >>> private String someProperty;
> >>>
> >>> private SomeService someReference;
> >>>
> >>> public Impl2( @Property("someProperty") String a,
> >>>
> >>> @Reference("someReference") SomeService b )
> >>>
> >>> {...}
> >>>
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> /** Declared constructor unambiguously identifying all Property and
> >>> Reference values
> >>>
> >>> plus an additional Property injected via a setter method */
> >>>
> >>> public class Impl3 {
> >>>
> >>> private String someProperty;
> >>>
> >>> private String anotherProperty;
> >>>
> >>> private SomeService someReference;
> >>>
> >>> public Impl3( @Property("someProperty") String a,
> >>>
> >>> @Reference("someReference") SomeService b)
> >>>
> >>> {...}
> >>>
> >>> @Property
> >>>
> >>> public void setAnotherProperty( String anotherProperty ) {...}
> >>>
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> /** No-arg constructor */
> >>>
> >>> public class Impl4 {
> >>>
> >>> @Property
> >>>
> >>> public String someProperty;
> >>>
> >>> @Reference
> >>>
> >>> public SomeService someReference;
> >>>
> >>> public Impl4() {...}
> >>>
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Yours, Mike.
> >>>
> >>> Strategist - Emerging Technologies, SCA & SDO.
> >>> Co Chair OASIS SCA Assembly TC.
> >>> IBM Hursley Park, Mail Point 146, Winchester, SO21 2JN, Great Britain.
> >>> Phone & FAX: +44-1962-818014 Mobile: +44-7802-467431
> >>> Email: mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> /
> >>> /
> >>>
> >>> /Unless stated otherwise above:
> >>> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with
> number
> >>> 741598.
> >>> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6
> >> 3AU/
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> >> generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> >> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> >> generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> >> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> > generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> > generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> /
> /
>
> /Unless stated otherwise above:
> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
> 741598.
> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU/
>
>
>
>
>
>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]