Search Results

Search found 44207 results on 1769 pages for 'java interface'.

Page 613/1769 | < Previous Page | 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620  | Next Page >

• How do I set the timeout for a JAX-WS webservice client?

  - by ninesided

  I've used JAXWS-RI 2.1 to create an interface for my web service, based on a WSDL. I can interact with the web service no problems, but haven't been able to specify a timeout for sending requests to the web service. If for some reason it does not respond the client just seems to spin it's wheels forever. Hunting around has revealed that I should probably be trying to do something like this: ((BindingProvider)myInterface).getRequestContext().put("com.sun.xml.ws.request.timeout", 10000); ((BindingProvider)myInterface).getRequestContext().put("com.sun.xml.ws.connect.timeout", 10000); I also discovered that, depending on which version of JAXWS-RI you have, you may need to set these properties instead: ((BindingProvider)myInterface).getRequestContext().put("com.sun.xml.internal.ws.request.timeout", 10000); ((BindingProvider)myInterface).getRequestContext().put("com.sun.xml.internal.ws.connect.timeout", 10000); The problem I have is that, regardless of which of the above is correct, I don't know where I can do this. All I've got is a Service subclass that implements the auto-generated interface to the webservice and at the point that this is getting instanciated, if the WSDL is non-responsive then it's already too late to set the properties: MyWebServiceSoap soap; MyWebService service = new MyWebService("http://www.google.com"); soap = service.getMyWebServiceSoap(); soap.sendRequestToMyWebService(); Can anyone point me in the right direction?!

  Read the article

• Static factory pattern with EJB3/JBoss

  - by purecharger

  I'm fairly new to EJBs and full blown application servers like JBoss, having written and worked with special purpose standalone Java applications for most of my career, with limited use of JEE. I'm wondering about the best way to adapt a commonly used design pattern to EJB3 and JBoss: the static factory pattern. In fact this is Item #1 in Joshua Bloch's Effective Java book (2nd edition) I'm currently working with the following factory: public class CredentialsProcessorFactory { private static final Log log = LogFactory.getLog(CredentialsProcessorFactory.class); private static Map<CredentialsType, CredentialsProcessor> PROCESSORS = new HashMap<CredentialsType, CredentialsProcessor>(); static { PROCESSORS.put(CredentialsType.CSV, new CSVCredentialsProcessor()); } private CredentialsProcessorFactory() {} public static CredentialsProcessor getProcessor(CredentialsType type) { CredentialsProcessor p = PROCESSORS.get(type); if(p == null) throw new IllegalArgumentException("No CredentialsProcessor registered for type " + type.toString()); return p; } However, in the implementation classes of CredentialsProcessor, I require injected resources such as a PersistenceContext, so I have made the CredentialsProcessor interface a @Local interface, and each of the impl's marked with @Stateless. Now I can look them up in JNDI and use the injected resources. But now I have a disconnect because I am not using the factory anymore. My first thought was to change the getProcessor(CredentialsType) method to do a JNDI lookup and return the SLSB instance that is required, but then I need to configure and pass the proper qualified JNDI name. Before I go down that path, I wanted to do more research on accepted practices. How is this design pattern treated in EJB3 / JEE?

  Read the article

• Compile error on inheritance of generic inner class extending with bounds

  - by Arne Burmeister

  I have a problem when compiling a generic class with an inner class. The class extends a generic class, the inner class also. Here the interface implemented: public interface IndexIterator<Element> extends Iterator<Element> { ... } The generic super class: public abstract class CompoundCollection<Element, Part extends Collection<Element>> implements Collection<Element> { ... protected class CompoundIterator<Iter extends Iterator<Element>> extends ImmutableIterator<Element> { ... } } The generic subclass with the compiler error: public class CompoundList<Element> extends CompoundCollection<Element, List<Element>> implements List<Element> { ... private class CompoundIndexIterator extends CompoundIterator<IndexIterator<Element>> implements IndexIterator<Element> { ... } } The error is: type parameter diergo.collect.IndexIterator<Element> is not within its bound extends CompoundIterator<IndexIterator<Element>> ^ What is wrong? The code compiles with eclipse, but bot with java 5 compiler (I use ant with java 5 on a mac and eclipse 3.5). No, I cannot convert it to a static inner class.

  Read the article

• Correct use of WSDL-generated sources

  - by John K

  How can I easily convert between manually written classes and WSDL-generated equivalents? I have a Java SE 6 thick client that calls a web service to get and store data. The client has a DAO that works with my entity classes, calls <Entity.toDto() to convert them to DTOs, and sends/receives that data with the web service. My issue stems from the fact that the entity classes live on both sides of the service interface: client and server. Each entity has a constructor from the DTO and a toDto function: public class EntityClass { public EntityClass(EntityClassDto dto); public EntityClassDto toDto(); ... } This means I have a handwritten DTO class that the client and server both use. However, the service interface expects the WSDL-generated classes. I have tried writing conversion code between the hand-written DTO and the WSDL-generated DTO and it is tedious and error-prone. What is a reasonable alternative to this? Some back-story: The thick client should be able to have a configurable backend: either direct to the DB or through this web service. The aforementioned DAO is the web service based implementation and another imlpementation that is JPA-based exists.

  Read the article

• What should i do to test EasyMock objects when using Generics ? EasyMock

  - by Arthur Ronald F D Garcia

  See code just bellow Our generic interface public interface Repository<INSTANCE_CLASS, INSTANCE_ID_CLASS> { void add(INSTANCE_CLASS instance); INSTANCE_CLASS getById(INSTANCE_ID_CLASS id); } And a single class public class Order { private Integer id; private Integer orderNumber; // getter's and setter's public void equals(Object o) { if(o == null) return false; if(!(o instanceof Order)) return false; // business key if(getOrderNumber() == null) return false; final Order other = (Order) o; if(!(getOrderNumber().equals(other.getOrderNumber()))) return false; return true; } // hashcode } And when i do the following test private Repository<Order, Integer> repository; @Before public void setUp { repository = EasyMock.createMock(Repository.class); Order order = new Order(); order.setOrderNumber(new Integer(1)); repository.add(order); EasyMock.expectLasCall().once(); EasyMock.replay(repository); } @Test public void addOrder() { Order order = new Order(); order.setOrderNumber(new Integer(1)); repository.add(order); EasyMock.verify(repository) } I get Unexpected method call add(br.com.smac.model.domain.Order@ac66b62): add(br.com.smac.model.domain.Order@ac66b62): expected: 1, actual: 0 Why does it not work as expected ??? What should i do to pass the test ???

  Read the article

• Covariance and Contravariance type inference in C# 4.0

  - by devoured elysium

  When we define our interfaces in C# 4.0, we are allowed to mark each of the generic parameters as in or out. If we try to set a generic parameter as out and that'd lead to a problem, the compiler raises an error, not allowing us to do that. Question: If the compiler has ways of inferring what are valid uses for both covariance (out) and contravariance(in), why do we have to mark interfaces as such? Wouldn't it be enough to just let us define the interfaces as we always did, and when we tried to use them in our client code, raise an error if we tried to use them in an un-safe way? Example: interface MyInterface<out T> { T abracadabra(); } //works OK interface MyInterface2<in T> { T abracadabra(); } //compiler raises an error. //This makes me think that the compiler is cappable //of understanding what situations might generate //run-time problems and then prohibits them. Also, isn't it what Java does in the same situation? From what I recall, you just do something like IMyInterface<? extends whatever> myInterface; //covariance IMyInterface<? super whatever> myInterface2; //contravariance Or am I mixing things? Thanks

  Read the article

• RemoteRef.invoke implementation

  - by phill

  Just finished a basic implementation of RMI for a class project, and now I am interested in how it is actually done. Sun is kind enough to provide the source for the majority of the Java classes with the JDK, however an implementation of RemoteRef doesn't seem to be there. I have the source for the interface RemoteRef along with the ServerRef interface and one implementation, ProxyRef, which just calls invoke on another RemoteRef, but none of the classes that implement actual code, ActivatableRef or UnicastRef for example, are included. I mention ActivatableRef and UnicastRef because I believe these have proper implementations of invoke thanks to the wonder that is Eclipse and its class file editor showing that it is more then just a method declaration. Although I can tell that it is more then a declaration, I can't get much more out of it, building a string here, throw exception there, but nothing about the process that is taking place to send the remote method call. Would anyone here happen to know where I can get this code, or if its even available? If it is not available, would anyone happen to know what the message being sent to the server looks like? phill

  Read the article

• Covariance and Contravariance inference in C# 4.0

  - by devoured elysium

  When we define our interfaces in C# 4.0, we are allowed to mark each of the generic parameters as in or out. If we try to set a generic parameter as out and that'd lead to a problem, the compiler raises an error, not allowing us to do that. Question: If the compiler has ways of inferring what are valid uses for both covariance (out) and contravariance(in), why do we have to mark interfaces as such? Wouldn't it be enough to just let us define the interfaces as we always did, and when we tried to use them in our client code, raise an error if we tried to use them in an un-safe way? Example: interface MyInterface<out T> { T abracadabra(); } //works OK interface MyInterface2<in T> { T abracadabra(); } //compiler raises an error. //This makes me think that the compiler is cappable //of understanding what situations might generate //run-time problems and then prohibits them. Also, isn't it what Java does in the same situation? From what I recall, you just do something like IMyInterface<? extends whatever> myInterface; //covariance IMyInterface<? super whatever> myInterface2; //contravariance Or am I mixing things? Thanks

  Read the article

• Access generic type parameter at runtime?

  - by Bart van Heukelom

  Event dispatcher interface public interface EventDispatcher { <T> EventListener<T> addEventListener(EventListener<T> l); <T> void removeEventListener(EventListener<T> l); } Implementation public class DefaultEventDispatcher implements EventDispatcher { @SuppressWarnings("unchecked") private Map<Class, Set<EventListener>> listeners = new HashMap<Class, Set<EventListener>>(); public void addSupportedEvent(Class eventType) { listeners.put(eventType, new HashSet<EventListener>()); } @Override public <T> EventListener<T> addEventListener(EventListener<T> l) { Set<EventListener> lsts = listeners.get(T); // ****** error: cannot resolve T if (lsts == null) throw new RuntimeException("Unsupported event type"); if (!lsts.add(l)) throw new RuntimeException("Listener already added"); return l; } @Override public <T> void removeEventListener(EventListener<T> l) { Set<EventListener> lsts = listeners.get(T); // ************* same error if (lsts == null) throw new RuntimeException("Unsupported event type"); if (!lsts.remove(l)) throw new RuntimeException("Listener is not here"); } } Usage EventListener<ShapeAddEvent> l = addEventListener(new EventListener<ShapeAddEvent>() { @Override public void onEvent(ShapeAddEvent event) { // TODO Auto-generated method stub } }); removeEventListener(l); I've marked two errors with a comment above (in the implementation). Is there any way to get runtime access to this information?

  Read the article

• Looking for detailed explanation of Hibernate UserType methods for mutable objects

  - by Tom

  I am creating a custom UserType class in Hibernate. The specific case is for an HL7v3 clinical document (I work in health IT). It is a mutable object and most of the documentation around the Hibernate UserType interface seems to center around immutable types. I want a better understanding of how and when the interface methods are used, specifically: assemble - why two parameters (one Serializable, one Object)? What is the use case for this method? disassemble - should I just implement this method to return a serializable form (e.g. String representation)? When and how is this method invoked? equals - is this for update? read? contention? dirty reads? What are the consequences of simply returning false in most cases? replace - I really don't understand where the three Object parameters come from, when this method is invoked, and what Hibernate expects to return, or how that return value is used. Any pointers would be appreciated. I've searched and read all I can find on the subject, but have not found much documentation at all explaining how these methods are used for mutable objects.

  Read the article

• Case Insensitive Ternary Search Tree

  - by Yan Cheng CHEOK

  I had been using Ternary Search Tree for a while, as the data structure to implement a auto complete drop down combo box. Which means, when user type "fo", the drop down combo box will display foo food football The problem is, my current used of Ternary Search Tree is case sensitive. My implementation is as follow. It had been used by real world for around 1++ yeas. Hence, I consider it as quite reliable. My Ternary Search Tree code However, I am looking for a case insensitive Ternary Search Tree, which means, when I type "fo", the drop down combo box will show me foO Food fooTBall Here are some key interface for TST, where I hope the new case insentive TST may have similar interface too. /** * Stores value in the TernarySearchTree. The value may be retrieved using key. * @param key A string that indexes the object to be stored. * @param value The object to be stored in the tree. */ public void put(String key, E value) { getOrCreateNode(key).data = value; } /** * Retrieve the object indexed by key. * @param key A String index. * @return Object The object retrieved from the TernarySearchTree. */ public E get(String key) { TSTNode<E> node = getNode(key); if(node==null) return null; return node.data; } An example of usage is as follow. TSTSearchEngine is using TernarySearchTree as the core backbone. Example usage of Ternary Search Tree // There is stock named microsoft and MICROChip inside stocks ArrayList. TSTSearchEngine<Stock> engine = TSTSearchEngine<Stock>(stocks); // I wish it would return microsoft and MICROCHIP. Currently, it just return microsoft. List<Stock> results = engine.searchAll("micro");

  Read the article

• Question about decorator pattern and the abstract decorator class?

  - by es11

  This question was asked already here, but rather than answering the specific question, descriptions of how the decorator pattern works were given instead. I'd like to ask it again because the answer is not immediately evident to me just by reading how the decorator pattern works (I've read the wikipedia article and the section in the book Head First Design Patterns). Basically, I want to know why an abstract decorator class must be created which implements (or extends) some interface (or abstract class). Why can't all the new "decorated classes" simply implement (or extend) the base abstract object themselves (instead of extending the abstract decorator class)? To make this more concrete I'll use the example from the design patterns book dealing with coffee beverages: There is an abstract component class called Beverage Simple beverage types such as HouseBlend simply extend Beverage To decorate beverage, an abstract CondimentDecorator class is created which extends Beverage and has an instance of Beverage Say we want to add a "milk" condiment, a class Milk is created which extends CondimentDecorator I'd like to understand why we needed the CondimentDecorator class and why the class Milk couldn't have simply extended the Beverage class itself and been passed an instance of Beverage in its constructor. Hopefully this is clear...if not I'd simply like to know why is the abstract decorator class necessary for this pattern? Thanks. Edit: I tried to implement this, omitting the abstract decorator class, and it seems to still work. Is this abstract class present in all descriptions of this pattern simply because it provides a standard interface for all of the new decorated classes?

  Read the article

• How do I implement a listener pattern over RMI using Spring?

  - by predhme

  So here is a generalized version of our application desgin: @Controller public class MyController { @Autowired private MyServiceInterface myServiceInterface; @RequestMapping("/myURL") public @ResponseBody String doSomething() { MyListenerInterface listener = new MyListenerInterfaceImpl(); myServiceInterface.doThenCallListener(listener); // do post stuff } } public interface MyListenerInterface { public void callA(); public void callB(); } public class MyListenerInterfaceImpl implements MyListenerInterface { // ... omitted for clarity } public interface MyServiceInterface { public void doThenCallListener(MyListenerInterface listener); } public class MyServiceImpl { public void doThenCallListener(MyListenerInterface listener) { // do stuff listener.callA(); } } Basically I have a controller that is being called via AJAX in which I am looking to return a response as a string. However, I need to make a call to the backend (MyServiceInterface). That guy is exposed through RMI by using Spring (man that was easy). But the service method as described requires a listener to be registered for invokation completion purposes. So what I assume I need to achieve is transparently to the backend make it so that when the listener methods are called, really the call is going over RMI. I would have thought Spring would have a simple way to wrap a POJO (not a service singleton) with RMI calls. I looked through their documentation but they had nothing besides exposing services via RMI. Could someone point me in the right direction?

  Read the article

• How do I remove implementing types from GWT’s Serialization Policy?

  - by Bluu

  The opposite of this question: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/138099/how-do-i-add-a-type-to-gwts-serialization-policy-whitelist GWT is adding undesired types to the serialization policy and bloating my JS. How do I trim my GWT whitelist by hand? Or should I at all? For example, if I put the interface List on a GWT RPC service class, GWT has to generate Javascript that handles ArrayList, LinkedList, Stack, Vector, ... even though my team knows we're only ever going to return an ArrayList. I could just make the method's return type ArrayList, but I like relying on an interface rather than a specific implementation. After all, maybe one day we will switch it up and return e.g. a LinkedList. In that case, I'd like to force the GWT serialization policy to compile for only ArrayList and LinkedList. No Stacks or Vectors. These implicit restrictions have one huge downside I can think of: a new member of the team starts returning Vectors, which will be a runtime error. So besides the question in the title, what is your experience designing around this?

  Read the article

• Invoking public method on a class in a different package via reflection

  - by KARASZI István

  I ran into the following problem. I have two different packages in package a I would like to call the implemented method of an interface in a package b but the implementing class has package visibility. So a simplifed code looks like this: package b; public final class Factory { public static B createB() { return new ImplB(); } public interface B { void method(); } static class ImplB implements B { public void method() { System.out.println("Called"); } } } and the Invoker: package a; import java.lang.reflect.Method; import b.Factory; import b.Factory.B; public final class Invoker { private static final Class<?>[] EMPTY_CLASS_ARRAY = new Class<?>[] {}; private static final Object[] EMPTY_OBJECT_ARRAY = new Object[] {}; public static void main(String... args) throws Exception { final B b = Factory.createB(); b.method(); final Method method = b.getClass().getDeclaredMethod("method", EMPTY_CLASS_ARRAY); method.invoke(b, EMPTY_OBJECT_ARRAY); } } When I start the program it prints out Called as expected and throws an Exception because the package visibility prohibits the calling of the discovered method. So my question is any way to solve this problem? Am I missing something in Java documentation or this is simply not possible although simply calling an implemented method is possible without reflection.

  Read the article

• Two Applications using the same index file with Hibernate Search

  - by Dominik Obermaier

  Hi, I want to know if it is possible to use the same index file for an entity in two applications. Let me be more specific: We have an online Application with a frondend for the users and an application for the backend tasks (= administrator interface). Both are running on the same JBOSS AS. Both Applications are using the same database, so they are using the same entities. Of course the package names are not the same in both applications for the entities. So this is our usecase: A user should be able to search via the frondend. The user is only allowed to see results which are tagged with "visible". This tagging happens in our admin interface, so the index for the frontend should be updated every time an entity is tagged as "visible" in the backend. Of course both applications do have the same index root folder. In my index folder there are 2 index files: de.x.x.admin.model.Product de.x.x.frondend.model.Product How to "merge" this via Hibernate Search Configuration? I just did not get it via the documentation... Thanks for any help!

  Read the article

• Alternatives to static methods on interfaces for enforcing consistency

  - by jayshao

  In Java, I'd like to be able to define marker interfaces, that forced implementations to provide static methods. For example, for simple text-serialization/deserialization I'd like to be able to define an interface that looked something like this: public interface TextTransformable<T>{ public static T fromText(String text); public String toText(); Since interfaces in Java can't contain static methods though (as noted in a number of other posts/threads: here, here, and here this code doesn't work. What I'm looking for however is some reasonable paradigm to express the same intent, namely symmetric methods, one of which is static, and enforced by the compiler. Right now the best we can come up with is some kind of static factory object or generic factory, neither of which is really satisfactory. Note: in our case our primary use-case is we have many, many "value-object" types - enums, or other objects that have a limited number of values, typically carry no state beyond their value, and which we parse/de-parse thousands of time a second, so actually do care about reusing instances (like Float, Integer, etc.) and its impact on memory consumption/g.c. Any thoughts?

  Read the article

• Class Generics break completely seperate method

  - by TheLQ

  I found a strange problem when I used class Generics Today: Setting some broke a completely separate method. Here's a small example class that illustrates the problem. This code works just fine public class Sandbox { public interface ListenerManagerTest { public Set<Listener> getListeners(); } public void setListenerManager(ListenerManagerTest listenerManager) { for (Listener curListener : listenerManager.getListeners()) return; } } Now as soon as I use class Generics, the getListeners() method returns Set<Object> instead of Set<Listener> public class Sandbox { public interface ListenerManagerTest<E extends Object> { public Set<Listener> getListeners(); } public void setListenerManager(ListenerManagerTest listenerManager) { for (Listener curListener : listenerManager.getListeners()) //Expected Listener, not Object return; } } What would cause this error? The ##java channel on Freenode said it was because of compile time candy and that I was using a raw type. But how would an raw class type break all generics in the class? And how would of worked before?

  Read the article

• Is dependency injection only for service type objects and singletons? (and NOT for gui?)

  - by sensui

  I'm currently experimenting with the Google's guice inversion of control container. I previously had singletons for just about any service (database, active directory) my application used. Now I refactored the code: all the dependencies are given as parameters to constructors. So far, so good. Now the hardest part is with the graphical user interface. I face this problem: I have a table (JTable) of products wrapped in an ProductFrame. I give the dependencies as parameters (EditProductDialog). @Inject public ProductFrame(EditProductDialog editProductDialog) { // ... } // ... @Inject public EditProductDialog(DBProductController productController, Product product) { // ... } The problem is that guice can't know what Product I have selected in the table, so it can't know what to inject in the EditProductDialog. Dependency Injection is pretty viral (if I modify one class to use dependency injection I also need to modify all the other classes it interacts with) so my question is should I directly instantiate EditProductDialog? But then I would have to pass manually the DBProductController to the EditProductDialog and I will also need to pass it to the ProductFrame and all this boils down to not using dependency injection at all. Or is my design flawed and because of that I can't really adapt the project to dependecy injection? Give me some examples of how you used dependency injection with the graphical user interface. All the examples found on the Internet are really simple examples where you use some services (mostly databases) with dependency injection.

  Read the article

• Is there a JSON library that can serialize Proxy objects?

  - by gmoore

  Using ActiveObjects as my ORM and Gson as my JSON processor. Ran into a problem going toJson from persisted objects. The problem is that my persisted class is actually an Interface and AO is proxying that object under the hood. Here's some sample code: Venue venue = manager.get(Venue.class, id); gson.toJson(venue); Comes up with this exception: java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException: Expecting parameterized type, got interface java.lang.reflect.InvocationHandler. Are you missing the use of TypeToken idiom? See http://sites.google.com/site/gson/gson-user-guide#TOC-Serializing-and... Because venue.getClass().getName() gives: $Proxy228 I've tried a few solutions in various combinations: gsonBuilder.registerTypeAdapter(Venue.class, newVenueSerializer()); Type listType = new TypeToken<Venue>() {}.getType(); Nothing has worked so far and I'm using a wonky field-by-field workaround. Any suggestions? I'm not married to Gson, so if there's an alternative library that can do this I'd be happy to use it.

  Read the article

• Two pass JSP page rendering

  - by dotsid

  Suppose an example. I have following interface: public interface DataSource<T> { Future<T> fetch(); } This datasource can do asynchronous data fetching. And we have following tag for using datasource in JSP: <html> <d:fetch from="${orderDS}" var="orders"> <c:foreach in="${orders}" var="order"> <div class="order"> <c:out value="${order.title}" /> </div> </c:foreach> </d:fetch> </html> So, what I want? I want JSP rendering engine to call my custom tag (FetchTag in this example) twice. On first call FetchTag will do DataSource.fetch() call and save Future locally as a object field. On second call FetchTag do Future.get() call and will be blocked until data becomes available. Is there any way to do such a thing?

  Read the article

• CXF code first service, WSDL generation; soap:address changes?

  - by jcalvert

  I have a simple Java interface/implementation I am exposing via CXF. I have a jaxws element in my Spring configuration file like this: <jaxws:endpoint id="managementServiceJaxws" implementor="#managementService" address="/jaxws/ManagementService" > </jaxws:endpoint> It generates the WSDL from my annotated interface and exposes the service. Then when I hit http://myhostname/cxf/jaxws/ManagementService?wsdl I get a lovely WSDL. At the bottom in the wsdl:service element, I'll see <soap:address location="http://myhostname/cxf/jaxws/ManagementService"/> However, some time a day or so later, with no application restart, hitting that same url produces: This causes a number of problems, but what I really want is to fix it. Right now, there's a particular client to the webservice that sets the endpoint to localhost; because it runs on the same machine. Is it possible the wsdl is getting regenerated and cached and then exposing the 'localhost' version? In part I don't know the exact mechanism by which one goes from a ?wsdl request in CXF to the response. It seems almost certain that it's retrieving some cached version, given that it's supposed to be determining the address by asking the servletcontainer (Jetty). For reference I know a stopgap solution is using the hostname on the client and making sure an alias in place so that it goes over the loopback. EDIT: For reference, I confirmed that if I bring my application up and first hit it over localhost, then querying for the wsdl via the hostname shows the address as localhost. Conversely, first hitting it over the hostname causes localhost requests to show the hostname. So obviously something is getting cached here.

  Read the article

• How can I qualify an autowired property with a variable from a config file using annotations?

  - by jiggy

  My specific problem is that I have configured two beans that implement the same interface and I have a third bean that has a property of that interface's type. I inject the property using a config property. So, assuming RemoteDataSource and LocalDataSource implement IDataSource and dao1 has a property of type IDataSource, my XML config might look like this: <bean id="datasource1" class="com.foo.RemoteDataSource"> <property name="url">${url}</property> </bean> <bean id="datasource2" class="com.foo.LocalDataSource"> <property name="path">${filepath}</property> </bean> <bean id="dao1" class="com.foo.MyDAO"> <property name="dataSource">${datasource}</property> </bean> With url, filepath and datasource being defined in an included properties file. We are now making a push for annotation-driven configuration and I'm not sure how to annotate my dao to put the data source configured in the property file. I want to do something like this, but it is evidently not allowed: @Autowired @Qualifier("${datasource}") public void setDataSource(IDataSource datasource) {...}

  Read the article

• Serialization of generic types - GWT

  - by sarav

  I have an interface like this public interface IField<T> extends IsSerializable { public String getKey(); public void setKey(String name); public T getValue(); public void setValue(T role); } And a class like this public class FieldImpl<T> implements IField<T> { private String key; public String getKey() { return key; } public void setKey(String key) { this.key = key; } public T getValue() { return value; } public void setValue(T value) { this.value = value; } private T value; public FieldImpl() { } public FieldImpl(String key, T value) { super(); this.key = key; this.value = value; } } When I try to compile I'm getting [ERROR] In order to produce smaller client-side code, 'Object' is not allowed; please use a more specific type (reached via server.sdk.model.IField) What is the cause for this? Is there any place I can read about GWT's generics support?

  Read the article

• "Abstract static" method - how?

  - by polyglot

  There are already several SO questions on why there is not abstract static method/field as such, but I'm wondering about how one would go about implementing the following psuedo-code: class Animal { abstract static int getNumberOfLegs(); // not possible } class Chicken inherits Animal { static int getNumberOfLegs() { return 2; } class Dog inherits Animal { static int getNumberOfLegs() { return 4; } Here is the problem: Assuming that I want make sure that every class that inherits Animal to contain getNumberOfLegs() method (i.e. almost like an interface, except I do want the abstract class to implement several methods that are common to all child classes, hence pure interface does not work here). getNumberOfLegs() obviously should be a static method (assuming that in a perfect world we dont' have crippled chicken and dogs so getNumberOfLegs is not instance-dependent). Without an "abstract static" method/field, one can either leave the method out from Animal class, then there is the risk that some child class do not have that method. Or one can make getNumberOfLegs an instance method, but then one would have to instantiate a class to find out how many legs that animal has - even though it is not necessary. How do one usually go about implementing this situation?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620  | Next Page >