« Return to Thread: DS or iPOJO or peaberry

Re: DS or iPOJO or peaberry

by clement escoffier :: Rate this Message:

On 18.06.2009, at 17:18, Guillaume Nodet wrote:

> I guess what I mean is that iPojo imposes some contraints on the pojo
> you build and wire together.
> Whereas the goal of blueprint is to be able to wire any legacy code
> without introducing any dependency on the OSGi API.
> IPojo hides some of the OSGi internals but if you take a look at
> http://felix.apache.org/site/white-board-pattern-handler.html, it it
> tightly bound to the OSGi api imho.

The mentioned handler is optional. It's only used if you want to
implement a Whiteboard pattern injecting ServiceReferences. This
handler is not commonly used. The "regular" iPOJO powered code has no
dependency on the OSGi API.

iPOJO injected properties limitations are:
- must have a constructor taking a String argument IF you want to use
the configuration admin, or XML descriptors (if you're using the API,
you can inject any type of object).
- Service Properties must be comparable (makes sense...)

Regards,

Clement

> I certainly did not want to start a flame war here ;-) just to point
> to another possibility.
>
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 17:03, Richard S. Hall<heavy@...>
> wrote:
>> On 6/18/09 10:56 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>>>
>>> Yeah, dependency injection, the fact that you can inject much more
>>> things than just simple values (collections, maps, arrays.
>>>
>>
>> This doesn't make sense to me. Dependency injection is covered by
>> iPOJO.
>> Property injection is no DI, it is configuration injection, no? At a
>> minimum, let's try to differentiate between the two.
>>
>> Are you saying collections, maps, arrays are simple values? If so,
>> what kind
>> of complex values supported by BP?
>>
>> -> richard
>>
>>> You can also define custom converters to handle legacy code.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 16:50, Richard S. Hall<heavy@...>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 6/18/09 10:35 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> FWIW, Spring-DM is being standardized as Blueprint services.
>>>>> You can find an implementation of the spec (soon to be
>>>>> published) at
>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/sandbox/blueprint/
>>>>>
>>>>> Blueprint is much more powerfull wrt dependency injection than
>>>>> DS /
>>>>> iPojo.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to hear how it is "much more powerful wrt to DI" than
>>>> iPOJO...I
>>>> can
>>>> only assume you are referring to property injection, which could
>>>> be more
>>>> flexible, but I cannot imagine anything else.
>>>>
>>>> -> richard
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The runtime is< 300k, so it's not too eavyweight either.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 15:31, Dmitry Skavish<skavish@...>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello all,
>>>>>> I am trying to understand the differences between those
>>>>>> technologies,
>>>>>> but
>>>>>> I
>>>>>> could not find any article which compares all them side by side.
>>>>>> Can somebody summarize pros and cons or point me to page where
>>>>>> this is
>>>>>> already done?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We are using Guice, so I guess the logical way is to use
>>>>>> peaberry, but
>>>>>> I
>>>>>> don't want to make a decision without knowing all the
>>>>>> differences.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I guess I am somewhat confused about iPOJO and DS because they
>>>>>> look to
>>>>>> me
>>>>>> strikingly similar. What is the main difference between them?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks a lot!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Dmitry Skavish
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA
> http://fusesource.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@...

« Return to Thread: DS or iPOJO or peaberry