Re: [Springide-eclip-developer] Do we really need support for separate lists for "normal" beans and inner beans in BeansConfig and BeansConfigSet?

[Torsten J. <tor...@on...>]

> In the case of inner beans the id is currently (?) the
> class of the surrounding 'outer' bean.  This makes implementing
> quick fix suggestions on inner beans v. tricky!

The code in CVS head handles inner beans differently now. Every inner 
bean get's a unique name. This name is created via 
EventBeanDefinitionReader's inner SimpleBeanDefinitionRegistry which 
mimics a Spring's DefaultListableBeanFactory.
EventBeanDefinitionParser stores inner beans in 
SimpleBeanDefinitionRegistry to get a unique bean name for anonymouse 
inner beans (name pattern:  "<class name>[#<occurrence counter>]").

This unique bean name is stored in the problem marker's attribute 
"beanID" (IBeansProjectMarker.BEAN_ID). So you can retrieve the related 
IBean instance via IBeansConfig.getBean(). To distinguish between a 
"real" bean and an inner bean use IBean.isInnerBean().


So I would like to remove all the obsolete inner-bean-related stuff  
(separate list of inner beans, getInnerBeans(), ..) from 
BeansConfigHandler and (I)BeansConfig. Any issues?

Cheers,
Torsten


On 02.12.2004, at 11:54, Watkins, David wrote:

> I'll take a look at the code but I think we need a 'universal
> id' for inner beans and the like.  The specific scenario I'm
> thinking about is the problem markers.  As you know they have
> a couple of attributes, including the bean id and the problem
> type.  In the case of inner beans the id is currently (?) the
> class of the surrounding 'outer' bean.  This makes implementing
> quick fix suggestions on inner beans v. tricky!
>
> Anyway, I'll take a look at the new stuff (the 'incomplete config
> set' stuff sounds good!).  I'm hoping it'll allow me to simplify
> some of the refactoring participant code as I shouldn't have to
> walk a tree anymore.  I'll let you know if I hit any problems.
>
> Cheers,
>   dw
>
>
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: spr...@li...
>> [mailto:spr...@li...]
>>  On Behalf Of Torsten Juergeleit
>> Sent: 02 December 2004 01:31
>> To: Spring IDE Developer List
>> Subject: [Springide-eclip-developer] Do we really need
>> support for separate lists for "normal" beans and inner beans
>> in BeansConfig and BeansConfigSet?
>>
>> While implementing the validation of bean references I added
>> the ability to Bean to know it's outer bean if it's an inner bean.
>> Now I'm just wondering if we still need to maintain separate
>> lists for the normal beans and inner beans in BeansConfig and
>> BeansConfigSet.
>>
>> This means that BeansConfig.getBeans() and
>> BeansConfigSet.getBeans() return the aggregated list of
>> normal and inner beans. The separate
>> getInnerBeans() methods are obsolete and will be removed from
>> the interfaces. If anyone still needs separate lists then the
>> aggregated list can be filtered via IBean.isInnerBean().
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Torsten
>>
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------
>> SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest &
>> candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
>> Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
>> http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/
>> _______________________________________________
>> Springide-eclip-developer mailing list
>> Spr...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springide-eclip-developer
>>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
> Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real 
> users.
> Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
> http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Springide-eclip-developer mailing list
> Spr...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springide-eclip-developer
>