IOC Type 6 discovered? Inverting the Inversion

Discussions

News: IOC Type 6 discovered? Inverting the Inversion

  1. IOC Type 6 discovered? Inverting the Inversion (18 messages)

    The final solution to the dependency injection problem might just have been discovered by Brian McCallister. After many trials and errors to correctly dissociate configuration from implementation, a legacy of numerous IOC types, Brian came up with a mechanism that weaves in at runtime and requires no XML configuration at all.

    Imagine fixing a bug via...
    update
        methods
    set
        method_body='return new Integer(42);'
    where
        package = 'org.example.foo' and
        name = 'getDayOfWeek';
    More details can be found here:
    Inverting the Inversion of Control

    note: take this entry with a grain of salt ;) pre-friday humor

    Threaded Messages (18)

  2. Hopefully indentations in the sample where made to a foreseen COBOL implementation.
  3. I'll Jump on the Bandwagon...[ Go to top ]

    ...as soon as it has a UML/MDA Modeling plugin for Eclipse.

    And please, be sure to throw only RuntimeExceptions ;-)
  4. I'll Jump on the Bandwagon...[ Go to top ]

    ...as soon as it has a UML/MDA Modeling plugin for Eclipse.And please, be sure to throw only RuntimeExceptions ;-)
    Yes, IoC 2D is the best type, but XML is a cool programming language too.
  5. I'll Jump on the Bandwagon...[ Go to top ]

    I was about to let it go, but I can't, just can't.
    [...] but XML is a cool programming language too.

    w3.org servers glitched for a sec, there...

    I'd very much like to know what do you compile your XML with. And please DON'T clarify saying "XML is a declarative programming language, c'mon; a man came out of my coffee cup and told me so!".
  6. Knocking you off the bandwagon[ Go to top ]

    I was about to let it go, but I can't, just can't.
    [...] but XML is a cool programming language too.
    w3.org servers glitched for a sec, there...I'd very much like to know what do you compile your XML with. And please DON'T clarify saying "XML is a declarative programming language, c'mon; a man came out of my coffee cup and told me so!".

    Actually if you are developing a UI with Lazslo or with Macromedia's Flex solution you actually do "program" with XML, and you do actually have a compiler that compiles it.

    Dave Wolf
    Cynergy Systems
  7. Knocking you off the bandwagon[ Go to top ]

    Actually if you are developing a UI with Lazslo or with Macromedia's Flex solution you actually do "program" with XML, and you do actually have a compiler that compiles it.Dave WolfCynergy Systems
    Nightmares come true.
  8. Knocking you off the bandwagon[ Go to top ]

    I guess you could consider every piece of note you scrap in a postick and stick to your monitor is "programming", but let's get real...
    XML by itself is no programming language. If and only if you augment it with semantics it COULD be considered a programming language, why not? But certainly not XML alone; at least that's my opinion.

    Regards,
    Martin
  9. I'll Jump on the Bandwagon...[ Go to top ]

    I was about to let it go, but I can't, just can't.
    [...] but XML is a cool programming language too.
    w3.org servers glitched for a sec, there...I'd very much like to know what do you compile your XML with. And please DON'T clarify saying "XML is a declarative programming language, c'mon; a man came out of my coffee cup and told me so!".

    Sorry, if this kind of humor hurts.
  10. I'll Jump on the Bandwagon...[ Go to top ]

    Sorry, I didn't get what you meant. But I apologize if my remark was a bit acid... I was just being a smartass. ;)

    Regards,
    Martin
  11. I'll Jump on the Bandwagon...[ Go to top ]

    Yes, IoC 2D is the best type, but XML is a cool programming language too.

    Huh ?
  12. woah...[ Go to top ]

    *loud pop* all my code has just turned in on itself and disappeared. Nice one brian, a new technique and code reduction - beautiful ....
  13. IOC Type 6 discovered? Inverting the Inversion[ Go to top ]

    Is TSS entering comedy business under the new managerment?
  14. So what? instead of using XML config, you use a database table to dynamically change the method string. Why not Groovy?
  15. Why does this remind me of Lisp?[ Go to top ]

    Perhaps its things like

    (in-package 'foo)
    (compile (defun get-day-of-week () '42))
  16. I can see a great potential for applying this technique in the next generation of automated voting machines. Unfortunately those backwards parts of the world where they still use paper ballots will miss out (sob!!).
  17. Performance woes[ Go to top ]

    Some of us may be scared about the performance implications of a virtual virtual-table lookup. Happily, Java Five's -javaagent flag comes to the rescue, by allowing the bytecodes of the allegedly buggy classes be redefined dynamically. Which starts to look shockingly similar to a microboot.

    -Patrick

    --
    Patrick Linskey
    Kodo JDO
    http://solarmetric.com
  18. Java is dead[ Go to top ]

    Why reinvent Smalltalk when there is couple of them already?
  19. Recall one of the advantage of IoC is to have the implementation hidden from the user of the class (or service?) by only showing what it needs thru either constructor or a set method. This makes use of interface programming. One concern comes out of my mind is that whether we will then "new" the implementation or the interface (which is prohibited by compiler i think). I'm not sure if some AOP weaver could help in this area to make it compilable.

    My 2 penny