Details
-
Type: Bug
-
Status: Open
-
Priority: Major
-
Resolution: Unresolved
-
Affects Version/s: 2.14.1
-
Fix Version/s: None
-
Component/s: PicoContainer (Java)
-
Labels:None
-
Number of attachments :
Description
I've encountered behavior which looks like a bug to me, but this is maybe by design. I'm not really fluent in Java so I'll write example in Scala. Hope that's ok.
class A(b: B)
class B(name: String)
val container = new DefaultPicoContainer
container.addComponent(classOf[A])
container.addComponent(new B("root"))
val scope = container.makeChildContainer
scope.addComponent(new B("child"))
val a = scope.getComponent(classOf[A])
expected: a.b.name = "child"
actual: a.b.name = "root"
It seems that Pico doesn't respect full dependency path when resolving components registered in parent container. It resolves component based on registration path, not resolution path. This makes it unusable for chaining state and overriding non-trivial components.
I suspect that this change will probably be code invasive, so before I take a better look at what Pico is doing I'm just wondering if you are interested in this behavior, did you try to implement it, but it was to complex, or any other info.
Thanks,
Rikard
I understand what you're saying in the example you gave, but right now it isn't possible to do what you describe. That said, I've often thought about how nice it would be to have that feature. You're right that AFAICT, it would be very code invasive, which is why I haven't tried to brave it for that kind of feature.
Paul or others? Any thoughts?