Skip to content

Conversation

sdaschner
Copy link
Contributor

@sdaschner sdaschner commented Aug 23, 2018

relates to #12

@sdaschner sdaschner force-pushed the issue/12-type-based-config branch 2 times, most recently from 0af687c to 8a0760c Compare September 11, 2018 13:39
@tomas-langer
Copy link
Contributor

I think that using POJOs is bringing too much complexity - we would have to either inject into private fields (not a good idea) or into constructors - in either case we have to duplicate work usually done by CDI.
I would prefer support for Interfaces, where we can handle configuration through a proxy.

@sdaschner sdaschner force-pushed the issue/12-type-based-config branch from 8a0760c to 0f9126d Compare May 2, 2019 12:19
@sdaschner sdaschner force-pushed the issue/12-type-based-config branch from 0f9126d to da3c1c5 Compare May 2, 2019 12:19
- added alternative collection lookup to zero-based indexes
- removed annotation
- only interfaces allowed

Signed-off-by: Sebastian Daschner <[email protected]>
@sdaschner sdaschner changed the title first thoughts on type-based configuration; added annotation, accesso… Type-based (composed) configuration May 3, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants