[cdi-dev] Today's meeting will be shorter and about SE

[John D. Ament]

I thought today's meeting was pretty good.  Based on one of the discussion
points, I wanted to try putting together an interface that described the
boot paradigm.  Unfortunately even in Java 8 it doesn't work too well, I
cannot assign a static variable in an interface the way I can in an
abstract class.  More importantly, it doesn't give us the private level
expectation I would look for in this case.  I best I could come up with
using an interface is:

public interface CDIBooter {
    default BeanManager initialize() {
        return initialize(new HashMap<>());
    }

    BeanManager initialize(Map<?,?> properties);

    void shutdown();

    class BootHolder {

        static CDIBooter instance = null;

    }

    static CDIBooter instance() {
        if(BootHolder.instance == null) {
            ServiceLoader<CDIBooter> serviceLoader =
ServiceLoader.load(CDIBooter.class);
            for(CDIBooter booter : serviceLoader) {
                BootHolder.instance = booter;
                break;
            }
        }
        return BootHolder.instance;
    }
}

where as the abstract class is a bit briefer, while also being private.

public abstract class CDIBooter {
    public BeanManager initialize() {
        return initialize(new HashMap<>());
    }

    public abstract BeanManager initialize(Map<?,?> properties);

    public abstract void shutdown();

    private static CDIBooter instance = null;

    public static CDIBooter instance() {
        if(instance == null) {
            ServiceLoader<CDIBooter> serviceLoader =
ServiceLoader.load(CDIBooter.class);
            for(CDIBooter booter : serviceLoader) {
                instance = booter;
                break;
            }
        }
        return instance;
    }
}

Obviously ignore concurrency issues, etc.  It does look to be safer to do
an abstract class, rather than a factory-interface.

John


On Wed Dec 17 2014 at 10:40:44 AM Antoine Sabot-Durand <
antoine at sabot-durand.net> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
>
> I have business matter and will have to shorten the meeting tonight (half
> an hour instead of 1h).
>
> I updated the SE doc and Antonio added useful annexes :
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LgsGT-AAlrF72Z5pW4xNQiVjUHGUME46ZmB-wwF35Yw/edit?usp=sharing
>
> I propose we focus on this in these 30 mn
>
> regards,
>
> Antoine
> _______________________________________________
> cdi-dev mailing list
> cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
>
> Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> code under the Apache License, Version 2 (http://www.apache.org/
> licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas provided on this list,
> the provider waives all patent and other intellectual property rights
> inherent in such information.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20141218/eea1b3e8/attachment-0001.html