You mean all the InvocationHandler classes in JdkProxy? I guess we could break those out into top-level classes, but then you'd have multiple implementations on your classpath if you made a dependency on commons-proxy-jdk. We could move those to "core" I guess.
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 7:49 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Ok for all excepted last point (i was not clear i think). The ProxyFactory > impl using jdk proxy uses Invocationhandler like the asm implementation so > it would be great to be able to share the handler classes between both impl. > > *Romain Manni-Bucau* > *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>* > *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/> > *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau* > *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau* > > > > 2013/8/1 James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> > >> On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 2:44 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau >> <rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > ok, >> > >> > here it is: https://gist.github.com/rmannibucau/6128964 >> > >> >> Thanks! >> >> > >> > 1) i didn't fully get the goal of stub module, any pointers? >> >> It provides features very similar to the mocking support in libraries >> like Mockito/EasyMock. Basically, you can "train" a proxy to do what >> you want in certain situations. >> >> > 2) in ProxyFactory methods have this kind of signature >> > >> > <T> T createDelegatorProxy( ClassLoader classLoader, ObjectProvider<?> >> > delegateProvider, >> > Class<?>... proxyClasses ); >> > >> > why <T>if ObjectProvider is not ObjectProvider<T> (same for Object for >> > others method). basically T isn't matched. >> > >> >> I'll have to take a look. I believe the <T> is there for "syntactic >> sugar", since you can pass in any classes you want really. Hopefully >> the user won't do something stupid and they'll actually pass Class<T> >> as one of the proxyClasses when they're asking for a return type of >> <T> back. Since you can have multiple proxy classes, the >> ObjectProvider can't really match any one particular one (it needs to >> support all). >> >> > 3) the jdk implementation uses InvocationHandler for the proxying, asm >> > implementation has almost the same (i didn't check but i started from an >> > exact copy), it would be great to get them in a common module to avoid to >> > duplicate it >> > >> >> We have our own interface for InvocationHander, it's called Invoker. >> Other libraries can be "adapted" to ours if you want to reuse >> something. >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
