You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@sling.apache.org by Nicolas Peltier <np...@apache.org> on 2020/08/31 10:07:08 UTC
[models] declaring constants for injectors
Hey
all injectors have name declared as direct string constants in getName
implementations (script-bindings, child-resources, self, ...)
not entirely sure it's still best practice to use constants rather than
literals in annotation, but if it's still the case, i guess declaring &
exposing those literals in the API would make sense.
Wdyt?
Nicolas
Re: [models] declaring constants for injectors
Posted by Paul Bjorkstrand <pa...@gmail.com>.
If the goal is to dissuade the use of the @Source, it might be worthwhile
to deprecate the annotation, and come up with a new one that is only
allowed on ElementType.ANNOTATION_TYPE. The deprecation, along with the
mentioned documentation changes, would signal that @Source should not be
used, and that an injector-specific annotation should be used (or created,
in the case of custom injectors) instead.
-Paul
On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 3:46 AM Nicolas Peltier <pe...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> so should we remove the "Available Injectors" entirely? move it after
> "Injector-specific annotation", or more clearly specify you should not use
> @source but those annotations?
> i'm in favour of the first one. Looks like there is quite a lot of legacy
> ways we should move elsewhere or remove
>
> Le lun. 31 août 2020 à 23:10, Stefan Seifert <ss...@pro-vision.de> a
> écrit :
>
> > you're right - the "@Inject @Source" pattern is the "old-style" syntax
> > which we still have to support for backwards compatibility but probably
> > should discourage in the docs and position the injector-specific
> > annotations more prominently, as they are the recommended way in my pov.
> >
> > stefan
> >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: Nicolas Peltier <pe...@gmail.com>
> > >Sent: Monday, August 31, 2020 1:22 PM
> > >To: Sling Developers List <de...@sling.apache.org>
> > >Subject: Re: [models] declaring constants for injectors
> > >
> > >i guess doc is a bit misleading here and we should not expose what you
> > >righteously call "implementation details" in the documentation (see
> > >"script-bindings" in
> > >https://sling.apache.org/documentation/bundles/models.html)
> > >
> > >Le lun. 31 août 2020 à 12:34, Nicolas Peltier <
> peltier.nicolas@gmail.com>
> > a
> > >écrit :
> > >
> > >> mm i thought some of them were only available through the @Source
> > >> annotation, but i will work my models annotations a bit more :-)
> > >>
> > >> Le lun. 31 août 2020 à 12:10, Stefan Seifert <ss...@pro-vision.de>
> a
> > >> écrit :
> > >>
> > >>> these string constants are normally not used in application code,
> > >because
> > >>> they use the typed injector annotations.
> > >>> so this is more an implementation detail and there is no need to
> > publish
> > >>> those constants as part of the API?
> > >>>
> > >>> stefan
> > >>>
> > >>> >-----Original Message-----
> > >>> >From: Nicolas Peltier <np...@apache.org>
> > >>> >Sent: Monday, August 31, 2020 12:07 PM
> > >>> >To: Sling Developers List <de...@sling.apache.org>
> > >>> >Subject: [models] declaring constants for injectors
> > >>> >
> > >>> >Hey
> > >>> >
> > >>> >all injectors have name declared as direct string constants in
> getName
> > >>> >implementations (script-bindings, child-resources, self, ...)
> > >>> >not entirely sure it's still best practice to use constants rather
> > than
> > >>> >literals in annotation, but if it's still the case, i guess
> declaring
> > &
> > >>> >exposing those literals in the API would make sense.
> > >>> >
> > >>> >Wdyt?
> > >>> >
> > >>> >Nicolas
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
>
Re: [models] declaring constants for injectors
Posted by Nicolas Peltier <pe...@gmail.com>.
so should we remove the "Available Injectors" entirely? move it after
"Injector-specific annotation", or more clearly specify you should not use
@source but those annotations?
i'm in favour of the first one. Looks like there is quite a lot of legacy
ways we should move elsewhere or remove
Le lun. 31 août 2020 à 23:10, Stefan Seifert <ss...@pro-vision.de> a
écrit :
> you're right - the "@Inject @Source" pattern is the "old-style" syntax
> which we still have to support for backwards compatibility but probably
> should discourage in the docs and position the injector-specific
> annotations more prominently, as they are the recommended way in my pov.
>
> stefan
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Nicolas Peltier <pe...@gmail.com>
> >Sent: Monday, August 31, 2020 1:22 PM
> >To: Sling Developers List <de...@sling.apache.org>
> >Subject: Re: [models] declaring constants for injectors
> >
> >i guess doc is a bit misleading here and we should not expose what you
> >righteously call "implementation details" in the documentation (see
> >"script-bindings" in
> >https://sling.apache.org/documentation/bundles/models.html)
> >
> >Le lun. 31 août 2020 à 12:34, Nicolas Peltier <pe...@gmail.com>
> a
> >écrit :
> >
> >> mm i thought some of them were only available through the @Source
> >> annotation, but i will work my models annotations a bit more :-)
> >>
> >> Le lun. 31 août 2020 à 12:10, Stefan Seifert <ss...@pro-vision.de> a
> >> écrit :
> >>
> >>> these string constants are normally not used in application code,
> >because
> >>> they use the typed injector annotations.
> >>> so this is more an implementation detail and there is no need to
> publish
> >>> those constants as part of the API?
> >>>
> >>> stefan
> >>>
> >>> >-----Original Message-----
> >>> >From: Nicolas Peltier <np...@apache.org>
> >>> >Sent: Monday, August 31, 2020 12:07 PM
> >>> >To: Sling Developers List <de...@sling.apache.org>
> >>> >Subject: [models] declaring constants for injectors
> >>> >
> >>> >Hey
> >>> >
> >>> >all injectors have name declared as direct string constants in getName
> >>> >implementations (script-bindings, child-resources, self, ...)
> >>> >not entirely sure it's still best practice to use constants rather
> than
> >>> >literals in annotation, but if it's still the case, i guess declaring
> &
> >>> >exposing those literals in the API would make sense.
> >>> >
> >>> >Wdyt?
> >>> >
> >>> >Nicolas
> >>>
> >>
>
RE: [models] declaring constants for injectors
Posted by Stefan Seifert <ss...@pro-vision.de>.
you're right - the "@Inject @Source" pattern is the "old-style" syntax which we still have to support for backwards compatibility but probably should discourage in the docs and position the injector-specific annotations more prominently, as they are the recommended way in my pov.
stefan
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Nicolas Peltier <pe...@gmail.com>
>Sent: Monday, August 31, 2020 1:22 PM
>To: Sling Developers List <de...@sling.apache.org>
>Subject: Re: [models] declaring constants for injectors
>
>i guess doc is a bit misleading here and we should not expose what you
>righteously call "implementation details" in the documentation (see
>"script-bindings" in
>https://sling.apache.org/documentation/bundles/models.html)
>
>Le lun. 31 août 2020 à 12:34, Nicolas Peltier <pe...@gmail.com> a
>écrit :
>
>> mm i thought some of them were only available through the @Source
>> annotation, but i will work my models annotations a bit more :-)
>>
>> Le lun. 31 août 2020 à 12:10, Stefan Seifert <ss...@pro-vision.de> a
>> écrit :
>>
>>> these string constants are normally not used in application code,
>because
>>> they use the typed injector annotations.
>>> so this is more an implementation detail and there is no need to publish
>>> those constants as part of the API?
>>>
>>> stefan
>>>
>>> >-----Original Message-----
>>> >From: Nicolas Peltier <np...@apache.org>
>>> >Sent: Monday, August 31, 2020 12:07 PM
>>> >To: Sling Developers List <de...@sling.apache.org>
>>> >Subject: [models] declaring constants for injectors
>>> >
>>> >Hey
>>> >
>>> >all injectors have name declared as direct string constants in getName
>>> >implementations (script-bindings, child-resources, self, ...)
>>> >not entirely sure it's still best practice to use constants rather than
>>> >literals in annotation, but if it's still the case, i guess declaring &
>>> >exposing those literals in the API would make sense.
>>> >
>>> >Wdyt?
>>> >
>>> >Nicolas
>>>
>>
Re: [models] declaring constants for injectors
Posted by Nicolas Peltier <pe...@gmail.com>.
i guess doc is a bit misleading here and we should not expose what you
righteously call "implementation details" in the documentation (see
"script-bindings" in
https://sling.apache.org/documentation/bundles/models.html)
Le lun. 31 août 2020 à 12:34, Nicolas Peltier <pe...@gmail.com> a
écrit :
> mm i thought some of them were only available through the @Source
> annotation, but i will work my models annotations a bit more :-)
>
> Le lun. 31 août 2020 à 12:10, Stefan Seifert <ss...@pro-vision.de> a
> écrit :
>
>> these string constants are normally not used in application code, because
>> they use the typed injector annotations.
>> so this is more an implementation detail and there is no need to publish
>> those constants as part of the API?
>>
>> stefan
>>
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: Nicolas Peltier <np...@apache.org>
>> >Sent: Monday, August 31, 2020 12:07 PM
>> >To: Sling Developers List <de...@sling.apache.org>
>> >Subject: [models] declaring constants for injectors
>> >
>> >Hey
>> >
>> >all injectors have name declared as direct string constants in getName
>> >implementations (script-bindings, child-resources, self, ...)
>> >not entirely sure it's still best practice to use constants rather than
>> >literals in annotation, but if it's still the case, i guess declaring &
>> >exposing those literals in the API would make sense.
>> >
>> >Wdyt?
>> >
>> >Nicolas
>>
>
Re: [models] declaring constants for injectors
Posted by Nicolas Peltier <pe...@gmail.com>.
mm i thought some of them were only available through the @Source
annotation, but i will work my models annotations a bit more :-)
Le lun. 31 août 2020 à 12:10, Stefan Seifert <ss...@pro-vision.de> a
écrit :
> these string constants are normally not used in application code, because
> they use the typed injector annotations.
> so this is more an implementation detail and there is no need to publish
> those constants as part of the API?
>
> stefan
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Nicolas Peltier <np...@apache.org>
> >Sent: Monday, August 31, 2020 12:07 PM
> >To: Sling Developers List <de...@sling.apache.org>
> >Subject: [models] declaring constants for injectors
> >
> >Hey
> >
> >all injectors have name declared as direct string constants in getName
> >implementations (script-bindings, child-resources, self, ...)
> >not entirely sure it's still best practice to use constants rather than
> >literals in annotation, but if it's still the case, i guess declaring &
> >exposing those literals in the API would make sense.
> >
> >Wdyt?
> >
> >Nicolas
>
RE: [models] declaring constants for injectors
Posted by Stefan Seifert <ss...@pro-vision.de>.
these string constants are normally not used in application code, because they use the typed injector annotations.
so this is more an implementation detail and there is no need to publish those constants as part of the API?
stefan
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Nicolas Peltier <np...@apache.org>
>Sent: Monday, August 31, 2020 12:07 PM
>To: Sling Developers List <de...@sling.apache.org>
>Subject: [models] declaring constants for injectors
>
>Hey
>
>all injectors have name declared as direct string constants in getName
>implementations (script-bindings, child-resources, self, ...)
>not entirely sure it's still best practice to use constants rather than
>literals in annotation, but if it's still the case, i guess declaring &
>exposing those literals in the API would make sense.
>
>Wdyt?
>
>Nicolas