Details
- 
        Type: New Feature New Feature
- 
        Status: Closed Closed
- 
            Priority: Major Major
- 
            Resolution: Fixed
- 
            Affects Version/s: 1.2-RC1
- 
            Fix Version/s: 1.0-beta-5, 1.2
- 
            Component/s: PicoContainer (Java)
- 
            Labels:None
- 
                        Number of attachments :
Description
Multicasters are moved but the default lifecycle really be applied to the default lifecycle.
> c) Multicaster. They are a fun thing and the new lifecycle support 
> looks very nice but what I don't understand is that it always gets an 
> instance of all components inside the container even if they aren't 
> interested in the lifecycle. It completely negates lazy instantiation 
> since it simply starts everything. And on a sideeffect things get icky 
> if you have 2 different lifecycles registered in one tree. 
> getComponentInstances in PicoContainer says:
>
Please raise an issue. One way to solve this is to introduce an 
AdapterFilter argument (with a default ImplementsAdapterFilter 
implementation used for these lifecycle methods).
http://lists.codehaus.org/pipermail/picocontainer-dev/2004-January/002241.html
Issue Links
Activity
 Aslak Hellesøy
 made changes  -
 Aslak Hellesøy
 made changes  - 
        | Field | Original Value | New Value | 
|---|---|---|
| Status | Open [ 1 ] | Closed [ 6 ] | 
| Resolution | Fixed [ 1 ] | |
| Fix Version/s | 1.0-beta-5 [ 10145 ] | |
| Assignee | Aslak Hellesoy [ rinkrank ] | 
 Jörg Schaible
 made changes  -
 Jörg Schaible
 made changes  - 
        | Status | Closed [ 6 ] | Reopened [ 4 ] | 
| Resolution | Fixed [ 1 ] | |
| Assignee | Aslak Hellesoy [ rinkrank ] | Mauro Talevi [ maurotalevi ] | 
 Jörg Schaible
 made changes  -
 Jörg Schaible
 made changes  - 
         Jörg Schaible
 made changes  -
 Jörg Schaible
 made changes  - 
         Jörg Schaible
 made changes  -
 Jörg Schaible
 made changes  - 
        | Component/s | PicoContainer (Java) [ 10191 ] | |
| Affects Version/s | 1.2-RC1 [ 11979 ] | |
| Fix Version/s | 1.2 [ 11330 ] | |
| Description | Multicasters are moved but the default lifecycle really be applied to the default lifecycle. > c) Multicaster. They are a fun thing and the new lifecycle support > looks very nice but what I don't understand is that it always gets an > instance of all components inside the container even if they aren't > interested in the lifecycle. It completely negates lazy instantiation > since it simply starts everything. And on a sideeffect things get icky > if you have 2 different lifecycles registered in one tree. > getComponentInstances in PicoContainer says: > Please raise an issue. One way to solve this is to introduce an AdapterFilter argument (with a default ImplementsAdapterFilter implementation used for these lifecycle methods). http://lists.codehaus.org/pipermail/picocontainer-dev/2004-January/002241.html | Multicasters are moved but the default lifecycle really be applied to the default lifecycle. > c) Multicaster. They are a fun thing and the new lifecycle support > looks very nice but what I don't understand is that it always gets an > instance of all components inside the container even if they aren't > interested in the lifecycle. It completely negates lazy instantiation > since it simply starts everything. And on a sideeffect things get icky > if you have 2 different lifecycles registered in one tree. > getComponentInstances in PicoContainer says: > Please raise an issue. One way to solve this is to introduce an AdapterFilter argument (with a default ImplementsAdapterFilter implementation used for these lifecycle methods). http://lists.codehaus.org/pipermail/picocontainer-dev/2004-January/002241.html | 
| Environment | 
 Jörg Schaible
 made changes  -
 Jörg Schaible
 made changes  - 
        | Status | Reopened [ 4 ] | Closed [ 6 ] | 
| Resolution | Fixed [ 1 ] | 
 Jörg Schaible
 made changes  -
 Jörg Schaible
 made changes  - 
        | Assignee | Mauro Talevi [ maurotalevi ] | Joerg Schaible [ joehni ] | 

 
        

I'm not 100% sure I fixed what you asked for, but I think I did. Please reopen if you wanted something else, and supply a test case to illustrate it.