[seam-dev] XML Configuration of producer fields

[Stuart Douglas]

No, it seems silly to force the user to create a class with a field solely so they can then configure it via XML. It will be applied to an existing field internally, but on a class that is part of the seam xml implementation.

Stuart 

On 25/08/2010, at 8:33 PM, Pete Muir wrote:

> 
> On 25 Aug 2010, at 11:01, Stuart Douglas wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On 24/08/2010, at 9:16 PM, Pete Muir wrote:
>> 
>>> Agreed, this would be very useful. 
>>> 
>>> The only (practical) issue I see is that Weld currently doesn't expect AnnotatedTtypes to be respected for EE-style injection (in some/all cases). I suspect that it should (nb. this is large a change in the container integration contract).
>>> 
>>> On 24 Aug 2010, at 09:39, Stuart Douglas wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I think that seam-xml needs to ability to programatically add resource (and other) producer fields.  My proposed syntax is:
>>>> 
>>>> <s:EntityManager>
>>>> <s:producerField/>
>>>> <s:PersistenceContext unitName="customer" />
>>>> <my:CustomerDatasource/>
>>>> </s:EntityManager>
>>>> 
>>>> which would be equivalent to:
>>>> 
>>>> @Produces
>>>> @PersistenceContext(unitName="main")
>>>> @CustomerDatasource
>>>> EntityManager entityManager;
>>>> 
>>>> This will also support other types of producer fields, such as weld extension generic bean producer fields and primitives:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> <s:String>
>>>> <s:producerField/>
>>>> <my:ApplicationVersion />
>>>> <s:value>3.0.0.GA</s:value>
>>>> </s:String>
>>> 
>>> I think it should be:
>>> 
>>> <ee:EntityManager>
>>> <ee:Produces />
>>> <ee:PersistenceContext unitName="customer" />
>>> <my:CustomerDatasource/>
>>> </ee:EntityManager>
>>> 
>>> What was the reason for introducing the special producerField keyword?
>> 
>> It was to distinguish these from normal bean declarations, however @Produces will never be applied directly to a bean class, so that should be enough.
> 
> Ah, so you aren't applying this to an existing field?