geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Fwd: Proposal for annotation processing (MyFaces)
Date Mon, 12 Mar 2007 17:09:37 GMT
I've started talking about my idea for how to do annotation  
processing in myfaces on the myfaces dev list.

thanks
david jencks


Begin forwarded message:

> From: David Jencks <djencks@apache.org>
> Date: March 12, 2007 11:43:23 AM EDT
> To: MyFaces Development <dev@myfaces.apache.org>
> Subject: Proposal for annotation processing
> Reply-To: "MyFaces Development" <dev@myfaces.apache.org>
>
> There's been a lot of discussion about annotation processing in a  
> long thread http://www.nabble.com/%40PreDestroy%2C-Servlet-API%2C- 
> tf3284592.html#a9136472
> The current state of the code is that managed objects are created  
> by MyFaces code, and then fed to an annotation processor using an  
> interface like:
>
> public interface AnnotationProcessor {
>   public void postConstruct(Object instance);
>   public void preDestroy(Object instance);
>   public void processAnnotations(Object instance);
> }
>
> (Exceptions removed for clarity)
>
> I have been implementing annotation support in the geronimo app  
> client container and the geronimo-jetty6 integration and studying  
> the openejb3 and native jetty annotation support and am starting to  
> look at annotation support in a geronimo-myfaces integration, and  
> have some ideas about how I'd like to handle geronimo injecting  
> dependencies into jsf managed beans.
>
> I'd like to propose that MyFaces use an interface like this for  
> dealing with managed object construction, dependency injection, and  
> lifecycle methods:
>
> public interface LifecycleProvider {
>     Object newInstance(String className);
>     void destroyInstance(Object o);
> }
>
> This would fit in well with how annotation processing/dependency  
> injection is done in the rest of geronimo.  It also would let the  
> container in which MyFaces is running supply additional features  
> such as supporting constructor dependency injection.
>
> To go into what is probably blindingly obvious detail, this would  
> be a MyFaces interface and the container in which MyFaces is  
> running would supply an object implementing this interface for each  
> application.
>
> It's more or less trivial to write an adapter between this  
> interface and the AnnotationProcessor interface currently in use,  
> for integration with containers that want to supply an  
> AnnotationProcessor.
>
> So far I've thought of two issues, IMO one minor and the other  
> requiring more thought (at least on my part :-).  Also I'm not at  
> all familiar with the jsf spec so it's entirely possible I'm  
> proposing details that can't be implemented.
>
> 1. The current code looks for ManagedBeanBuilder.NONE in between  
> injecting dependencies and calling postConstruct.  I don't think  
> this is appropriate: I think whatever is handling the annotations  
> should know not to call postConstruct for this class.  If however  
> the same class can be used in several different scopes the  
> newInstance method could take the ManagedBean as parameter instead  
> of the class name.
>
> 2. I'm proposing that the container inject an instance of  
> LifecycleProvider for each jsf application.  This leads to the  
> question, injects into what?  One simple possibility is a singleton  
> LifecycleProviderFactory that indexes LifecycleProvider by  
> application classloader.  However I wonder if there is a way to  
> more directly inject the LifecycleProvider into the parts of  
> MyFaces that actually need to use it rather than making these  
> components go fishing for the one they need.  The kind of lazy  
> initialization currently in wide use requires a lot more  
> synchronization than it currently has to work reliably.  I would  
> prefer to use constructor dependency injection to final fields to  
> avoid this kind of problem.
>
> I've opened a jira issue to hold code samples related to this  
> proposal, and attached some initial implementations of these ideas  
> for discussion.  Right now these new classes aren't hooked up to  
> MyFaces, although I plan to work on that next.
>
> Initial classes:
>
> A      core/impl/src/main/java/org/apache/myfaces/config/annotation/ 
> LifecycleProviderFactory.java
> abstract class for singleton factory.
>
> A      core/impl/src/main/java/org/apache/myfaces/config/annotation/ 
> ApplicationIndexedLifecycleProviderFactory.java
>  a LifecycleProviderFactory that expects to be populated by an  
> external framework, with one LifecycleProvider instance per  
> application classloader.
>
> A      core/impl/src/main/java/org/apache/myfaces/config/annotation/ 
> LifecycleProviderToAnnotationProcessorAdapter.java
> an adapter between the LifecycleProvider implementation I'm  
> proposing and the existing AnnotationProcessor interface currently  
> in use.  This basically relies on there being only one  
> AnnotationProcessor shared between all applications.  This matches  
> the current implementation but I think it is unsatisfactory in  
> general.
>
> A      core/impl/src/main/java/org/apache/myfaces/config/annotation/ 
> LifecycleProvider.java
> Proposed interface for MyFaces to plug in external services that  
> handle annotations, object construction, etc.
>
> A      core/impl/src/main/java/org/apache/myfaces/config/annotation/ 
> AnnotationProcessorLifecycleProviderFactory.java
> a LifecycleProviderFactory that uses the  
> LifecycleProviderToAnnotationProcessorAdapter.
>
> The jira issue is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-1559
>
> Comments? Flames?
>
> many thanks,
> david jencks
>
>
>
>
>


Mime
View raw message