"alesj" wrote :
| What's the difference between local and non-local retrievers (from
MetaDataContext):
|
| | /**
| | * Get the retrievals
| | *
| | * @return the retrievals
| | */
| | List<MetaDataRetrieval> getRetrievals();
| |
| | /**
| | * Get the local retrievals
| | *
| | * @return the local retrievals
| | */
| | List<MetaDataRetrieval> getLocalRetrievals();
| |
|
| A MetaDataContext is made of local retrievals and a parent context.
| retrievals = local + parent retrievals.
|
| anonymous wrote :
| | Any quick tips on how MetaData.hasInstanceMetaData() should look like?
| | Should it still use MetaDataContext as current impl in AOPConstructorJoinpoint
does?
|
| Just move the AOP alogrithm into the MetaData/bridge.
| i.e. see whether the backing MetaDataContext has an INSTANCE scope
| and whether that scope has local annotations or metadata.
|
| A more complete api would be to allow
| MetaData.getScopeMetaData(ScopeKey)
| which would produce a MetaData backed by the local retrievals of that scope
| and add an isEmpty() to the MetaData api.
|
| The hasInstanceMetaData() could then be implemented as:
|
| | MetaData instance = getScopedMetaData(instanceScope);
| | return instance.isEmpty();
| |
| making it redundant.
|
| But that might be a bit more complicated to implement with the caching, etc.?
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4080801#...
Reply to the post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...