Support Forums: Message List - EJB 3.0 - What's wrong with @Inject? http://www.theserverside.com Most recent forum messages en Jive Forums Silver 5.5.30 (www.jivesoftware.com) Sun, 19 May 2013 15:53:14 -0400 org http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=25947 When you are replying and click "QUOTE ORIGINAL MESSAGE", the text of the original message appears in a blockquote. <a href="http://www.guzelporno.com"...]]> Sat, 30 Oct 2010 22:59:06 -0400 Sat, 30 Oct 2010 22:59:06 -0400 Sat, 30 Oct 2010 22:59:06 -0400 Oct 30, 2010 asdada asdadad 0 EJB 3.0 - What's wrong with @Inject? http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=25947
really very useful information. thank you. dizi izle I like your site. porno izle

]]> Wed, 06 Oct 2010 13:26:07 -0400 Wed, 06 Oct 2010 13:26:07 -0400 Wed, 06 Oct 2010 13:26:07 -0400 Oct 6, 2010 yasal turk 0 EJB 3.0 - What's wrong with @Inject? http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=25947
I never said "empty bean construction". On the contrary, I said "expensive constructors".
You defended settor injection and the pooling of blank beans. You complained that construction is slow....]]> Tue, 18 May 2004 16:01:19 -0400 Tue, 18 May 2004 16:01:19 -0400 Tue, 18 May 2004 16:01:19 -0400 May 18, 2004 Cedric Beust 0 EJB 3.0 - What's wrong with @Inject? http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=25947 I never said "empty bean construction". On the contrary, I said "expensive constructors".You defended settor injection and the pooling of blank beans. You complained that construction is slow. So we're...]]> Tue, 18 May 2004 13:50:45 -0400 Tue, 18 May 2004 13:50:45 -0400 Tue, 18 May 2004 13:50:45 -0400 May 18, 2004 Brian Miller 1 EJB 3.0 - What's wrong with @Inject? http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=25947
Moreover, if the EJB3 spec goes for constructor injection , there would be no need for annotations whatsoever. What's declared in the constructor(s) is what the container has to provide. Period.
I agree that...]]> Tue, 18 May 2004 04:39:18 -0400 Tue, 18 May 2004 04:39:18 -0400 Tue, 18 May 2004 04:39:18 -0400 May 18, 2004 Michal Maczka 0 EJB 3.0 - What's wrong with @Inject? http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=25947 <Whenever an object is expensive to create, you are probably better off pooling it.-- CedricThe point is: Typical business objects do not hold non-thread-safe resources. They access a JDBC DataSource or Hibernate...]]> Tue, 18 May 2004 04:28:30 -0400 Tue, 18 May 2004 04:28:30 -0400 Tue, 18 May 2004 04:28:30 -0400 May 18, 2004 Juergen Hoeller 0 EJB 3.0 - What's wrong with @Inject? http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=25947
The interest in pooling is not in avoiding garbage collection but in avoiding creating objects whose constructor is very expensive.
I agree that reclamation is cheap, since a multiprocessor can do it asynchronously on...]]> Mon, 17 May 2004 23:51:37 -0400 Mon, 17 May 2004 23:51:37 -0400 Mon, 17 May 2004 23:51:37 -0400 May 17, 2004 Cedric Beust 3 EJB 3.0 - What's wrong with @Inject? http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=25947 The interest in pooling is not in avoiding garbage collection but in avoiding creating objects whose constructor is very expensive.I agree that reclamation is cheap, since a multiprocessor can do it asynchronously on an otherwise...]]> Mon, 17 May 2004 21:05:22 -0400 Mon, 17 May 2004 21:05:22 -0400 Mon, 17 May 2004 21:05:22 -0400 May 17, 2004 Brian Miller 4 EJB 3.0 - What's wrong with @Inject? http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=25947 It's just lame baggage, or as Sun's HotSpot Performance FAQ says:"Pooling objects will cause them to live longer than necessary. The garbage collection...]]> Mon, 17 May 2004 17:48:34 -0400 Mon, 17 May 2004 17:48:34 -0400 Mon, 17 May 2004 17:48:34 -0400 May 17, 2004 Cedric Beust 5 EJB 3.0 - What's wrong with @Inject? http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=25947 Moreover, if the EJB3 spec goes for constructor injection , there would be no need for annotations whatsoever. What's declared in the constructor(s) is what the container has to provide. Period.I agree that constructor injection...]]> Mon, 17 May 2004 17:33:31 -0400 Mon, 17 May 2004 17:33:31 -0400 Mon, 17 May 2004 17:33:31 -0400 May 17, 2004 Brian Miller 7 verbs, adjectives, nouns....who cares? http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=25947 Mon, 17 May 2004 12:14:00 -0400 Mon, 17 May 2004 12:14:00 -0400 Mon, 17 May 2004 12:14:00 -0400 May 17, 2004 Bill Burke 0 Why adjectives? http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=25947 How about @Inject setFoo():  "inject a dependency using this setter method"I know which one I prefer.Gavin, thanks for some level headed comment, the thread is very confusing to me. But as I make my mind I...]]> Mon, 17 May 2004 12:05:22 -0400 Mon, 17 May 2004 12:05:22 -0400 Mon, 17 May 2004 12:05:22 -0400 May 17, 2004 matthew smith 0 EJB 3.0 - What's wrong with @Inject? http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=25947
I especially would like to see the issue of multiple configurations addressed.

Will one be able to work without the annotations in EJB 3? In this case, could one do without the...]]> Mon, 17 May 2004 11:05:27 -0400 Mon, 17 May 2004 11:05:27 -0400 Mon, 17 May 2004 11:05:27 -0400 May 17, 2004 Kevin Lewis 0 EJB 3.0 - What's wrong with @Inject? http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=25947 The method based injection will not really allow the container to do true lazy injection as it will have to do it when any method on the object will be called, even if that method makes no use of the injected dependency. On the other hand, if...]]> Mon, 17 May 2004 09:32:39 -0400 Mon, 17 May 2004 09:32:39 -0400 Mon, 17 May 2004 09:32:39 -0400 May 17, 2004 Michal Maczka 0 EJB 3.0 - What's wrong with @Inject? http://www.theserverside.com/discussions/thread.tss?thread_id=25947 In other words, materializing the datasource is a crosscutting concern, it should not be part of my business logicYou are right! Having the constructor declare the dependency will break you object contract, if you decide to...]]> Mon, 17 May 2004 09:15:50 -0400 Mon, 17 May 2004 09:15:50 -0400 Mon, 17 May 2004 09:15:50 -0400 May 17, 2004 Emmanuel Pirsch 1