Four airports to rule them all Evil Wiki Spam
Dec 17


EJB, Java, Lightweight Containers, Tech Add comments

After hearing more about EJB 3, and talking to various people, why are we putting dependency Injection semantics in an EJB spec?

I can see one reason: “Let’s just get EJB 3 done”

This is a reason for not splitting the persistence API into a truly seperate JSR (although it IS mean to be a seperate spec/tck/runtime).

Dependency injection is a very generic concern, and one that should be shared throughout a bunch of specs. One tiny JSR could flush out the semantics
of dependency injection, and end up with javax.dependency.*.

Then EJB 3 would specify that “When you @Inject a transaction manager…. you must do X”. A future Servlet spec could do the same thing for their resources, etc etc.

Also, lightweight containers would have the option of groking these annotations too, without needing some ejb.jar.

Wouldn’t that be nice?

6 Responses to “javax.dependency.Inject”

  1. James Strachan Says:

    The problem is, apart from saying ‘use POJOs with constructors or properties and the odd annotation here and there’, there’s not a whole lot to put in the DI spec :).

    Maybe the DI spec is gonna be the JSR which tries to standardise common annnotations? (Not that we need annotations for DI)

  2. Dion Says:

    God forbid a small spec ;)

  3. Gay Teen Ass Says:

    Free Gay Ass Galleries

  4. battery Says: hp dv1000 battery,

  5. battery Says: laptop batteries

  6. battery Says:

    dell inspiron b120 battery

Leave a Reply

Spam is a pain, I am sorry to have to do this to you, but can you answer the question below?

Q: What are the first four letters in the word British?