I use contructor injection in my solution, but this one class has a property that i do not want to pass in the constructor where i have the invariant dependencies.
Let's say i got an ILogger and it has a FileName property i want to set, while still having it set the dependancies in the contructor.
How do i go about registering the type, and at the same time pass the defaunt connection string.
I hope there is an easy way to do it - preferably without decorating the property with an attribute, but if the setup is easier with the attribute i guess that's cool :)
So the question is, how do i inject a property value on an object that also uses contructor injection - with Unity.
UPDATE: I mentioned it in the title, but i forgot to elaborate in the body of the text - i want to set these dependencies up manually (in code) as opposed to in a config file.
Ok i guess it helped to ask the question, i found out - here it is.
container.Configure<InjectedMembers>().ConfigureInjectionFor<BasicLogger>(
new InjectionProperty("FileName", #"C:\test.log")
);
If you are injecting properties you have to use [Dependency] or else manually inject that dependency.
You usually want an IConfiguration interface to be injected. This would probably have a LogFile property that you can read.
The Configuration implimentation is usually just a simple wrapper to read items from the config file.
Related
How do I completely disable using "builders" in MapStruct? I don't want to use them at all as they are causing all kinds of issues for me.
I created the service file under META-INF (I would prefer a way to assign it to the mapping builder= but I did not see any examples how to do it right in code).
It is still trying to use Immutables "builder" instance instance of the "ModifiableXXX" instance I want to map to. I'd even take a way of forcing it to the modifiable type if that is available.
In another mapping, using an update the ModifiableXXX (with #AfterMapping and #MappingTarget) approach works.
My mapper looks like this right now:
#Mapper
public interface MongoProjectMapper
{
ModifiableProject mapModel(MongoProject project);
#AfterMapping
ModifiableProject updateProject(MongoEntity e, #MappingTarget ModifiableProject p);
}
From Mapstruct version 1.3.1.Final we can use annotation org.mapstruct.Builder#disableBuilder within: #BeanMapping, #Mapper or #MapperConfig
#Mapper(builder = #Builder(disableBuilder = true))
public interface ProjectMapper
Have a look at #mapping-with-builders and documentation
Completely disabling builders is possible via the NoOpBuilderProvider. You need to create a org.mapstruct.ap.spi.BuilderProvider file in the META-INF/services directory with org.mapstruct.ap.spi.NoOpBuilderProvider as it’s content. This will completely disable the builders.
There is a feature request to make this more granular and disable it via #BeanMapping or on the mapper level. Have a look at mapstruct/mapstruct#1661
I've decided to use fluent mapping in Entity Framework. My intention was to map everyting by code without any atributes and auto mapping functions. Best way I've found is class EntityTypeConfiguration, that I implement for each entity in my project.
Later I add property to one of my entity. This property isn't needed to be persisted. I've expected, that until I add mapping for this property, it will be ignored by database and persistence layer. Unfortunatly it doesn't work that way, and property is mapped. Only way is to use Ignore method or NotMapped attribute, but I don't want to do it explicitly.
Is there any way, to stop Entity Framework from automapping? I've tried to remove all Conventions from DbModelBuilder, but it doesn't help.
So far as I am aware, there is no other way around it. You need to use either Ignore() or [NotMapped]. I tend to prefer the former as it does not clutter up the model.
Actually I have tried a lot of ways:
- custom convention to remove mapped properties
- removing all conventions
But the easiest (and cleanest) way was to use reflection inside the mapping class and to disable all property mappings that weren't configured.
The code for that (and also an usage example) is inside my public gist.
https://gist.github.com/hidegh/36d92380c720804dee043fde8a863ecb
I just started using the Netbeans 7.1 beta and it is calling out errors of a type which I have never seen before. Specifically:
A managed bean with a public field should not declare any scope other than #Dependent.
The fields it is complaining about are public static final. I can understand the restriction on non-static fields, but I can't think of a good reason this would not be allowed for a static field. Unfortunately I use a lot of them since I don't like having constants in my code.
I note that even though I get the red dot in the margin in the editor, the maven-driven build still works and GlassFish still runs my application the way I would expect.
So what is my denoument on this issue? Am I going to have to move my static fields elsewhere or is there another way of handling this?
Quoting the javax.enterprise.inject package javadocs:
If a managed bean has a public field, it must have scope #Dependent.
But I do agree wih #BalusC that if this compiles, Netbeans should report it as Warning (does it?).
Anyway, are those constants really part of the API? I mean, do you access they anywhere else but within their own classes? If not, reduce visibility to private. (If you just need to access the constants from the view you can also create accessors for the private constant). If yes, I would suggest you to move them somewhere else anyway.
Public fields (static or not) aren't proxyable - that's why they can only be dependent scoped. To work around this you obviously can access them through getter methods.
Looks like the class that is generated for PlaceHistoryMapper is hard-coded to use AbstractPlaceHistoryMapper as the super class.
So, I am trying to work around this by trying to replace this AbstractPlaceHistoryMapper with a custom mapper of mine using deferred binding . I am using the following rule in my *.gwt.xml:
<replace-with class="com.google.gwt.place.impl.AbstractPlaceHistoryMapper">
<when-type-is class="com.test.sampleapp.CustomPlaceHistoryMapper" />
</replace-with>
But for some reason the replace does not seem to be happening. CustomPlaceHistoryMapper is not getting kicked in and the generated class still uses AbstractPlaceHistoryMapper.
Any thoughts/pointers as to what might be resulting this behavior are much appreciated.
Note: I have also posted this on the GWT group but haven't received an answer so far.
To make the deferred binding work a class must be created with GWT.create(). However, AbstractPlaceHistoryMapper is only used as an extended class. So it will never be created via GWT.create, but always by instantiation the subclass. And therefor deferred binding won't work in this case. If you want a complete different implementation you have to implement a custom PlaceHistoryMapper, and manage the known tokens yourself. This also means you can't use the History annotations either.
As a side note the classnames in your rule should be swapped. But for the end result this doesn't matter, since it won't work in the first place.
It is absolutely possible to have custom history tokens (eg. #mail or #mail/bla instead of only #mail:inbox) using the out-of-the-box Place-related classes that GWT (2.0) provides.
Instead of replacing AbstractPlaceHistoryMapper you could instantiate the default PlaceHistoryMapper passing in it's constructor your implementation of PlaceHistoryMapper<T> or PlaceHistoryMapperWithFactory<T>.
eg.:
final PlaceHistoryHandler placeHistoryHandler = new PlaceHistoryHandler(new CustomHistoryMapper());
You will be able then to map tokens as you wish.
I personally recommend you to use an unique PlaceTokenizer in you mapper custom implementation so that I dont have to have an inner PlaceTokenizer class in each of your Places.
Hope that helps. Feel free to ask any doubts.
When Instantiating a class, Windsor by default treats all public properties of the class as optional dependencies and tries to satisfy them. In my case, this creates a rather complicated circular dependency which causes my application to hang.
How can I explicitly tell Castle Windsor that it should not be trying to satisfy a public property? I assume there must be an attribute to that extent. I can't find it however so please let me know the appropriate namespace/assembly.
If there is any way to do this without attributes (such as Xml Configuration or configuration via code) that would be preferable since the specific library where this is happening has to date not needed a dependency on castle.
You can use the Castle.Core.DoNotWireAttribute attribute to stop a property from being wired up by the IoC container (this is in the Castle.Core assembly, which means your library only needs to take a dependency on the lightweight Castle.Core assembly - if for example you want to use the code without an inversion of control container altogether, or in a different IoC container).
I don't believe there's any way to prevent wiring from occurring in the Xml configuration, but it would be reasonably easy to add support for this - if I had to do this I would probably:
Introduce some kind of attribute on the property declaration in the xml: <myprop wire="false" />
Inherit from PropertiesDependenciesModelInspector, overriding the InspectProperties method to apply some additional logic to identifying which properties should be added as dependencies to the components model (inspecting the model.Configuration for the wire="false" attribute/value pair).
Inherit from DefaultComponentModelBuilder and override the InitializeContributors to include your replacement PropertiesDependenciesModelInspector - or just remove the existing properties contributor and add your own at run time via the AddContributor/RemoveContributor methods.
Replace the ComponentModelBuilder service instance assigned to the kernel of your container.
Another approach which could work for you is to just manually remove the dependencies from the model before any instances of the service are requested ie.
kernel.GetHandler(typeof(MyComponent)).ComponentModel.Dependencies.RemoveAll(d => d.DependencyKey == "PropertyThatShouldNotBeWired");
YMMV with that approach though - especially if you have startable services or other facilities which may be eagerly instantiating your component after it's registered.
I created a facility to help with this:
Castle.Facilities.OptionalPropertyInjection
I do not know which version of Castle you guys were using at that time, but none of the solution mentioned were working. Plus, there is a lot of dead links.
With castle 3.1, here the solution I came up with (thanks to some castle source code digging):
container.Register(Component.For(type)
.LifestyleTransient()
.Properties( propertyInfo => propertyInfo.PropertyType != typeof(MyOtherType)));
The 'Properties' function adds a property filter used by castle when constructing the ComponentModel. In my case, all properties dependency will be satisfied except the property type 'MyOtherType'.
Maybe it will be helpful for someone. In Windsor 4.1 there is PropertiesIgnore method during registration.
Component.For<Role>().LifestyleTransient().PropertiesIgnore((model, propertyInfo) => true)
DoNotWireAttribute
Class: http://svn.castleproject.org:8080/svn/castle/trunk/Core/Castle.Core/Attributes/DoNotWireAttribute.cs
Test: http://svn.castleproject.org:8080/svn/castle/trunk/InversionOfControl/Castle.Windsor.Tests/IgnoreWireTestCase.cs
This can be achieved by the following code:
var container = new WindsorContainer();
// We don't want to inject properties, only ctors
var propInjector = container.Kernel.ComponentModelBuilder
.Contributors
.OfType<PropertiesDependenciesModelInspector>()
.Single();
container.Kernel.ComponentModelBuilder.RemoveContributor(propInjector);
Source Castle Windsor Documentation
Posted this on the google groups forum too here: http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel/browse_thread/thread/43aa513817bd057a