001 /*****************************************************************************
002 * Copyright (C) PicoContainer Organization. All rights reserved. *
003 * ------------------------------------------------------------------------- *
004 * The software in this package is published under the terms of the BSD *
005 * style license a copy of which has been included with this distribution in *
006 * the LICENSE.txt file. *
007 * *
008 * Original code by *
009 *****************************************************************************/
010 package org.picocontainer.alternatives.issues;
011
012 import org.junit.Test;
013 import org.picocontainer.DefaultPicoContainer;
014 import org.picocontainer.MutablePicoContainer;
015 import org.picocontainer.behaviors.ImplementationHiding;
016 import org.picocontainer.injectors.ConstructorInjection;
017 import org.picocontainer.visitors.VerifyingVisitor;
018
019 public class Issue0214TestCase {
020
021 // This bug as described in the bug report, http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/PICO-214, cannot be reproduced.
022 @Test public void testTheBug() {
023 final MutablePicoContainer pico = new DefaultPicoContainer(new ImplementationHiding().wrap(new ConstructorInjection()));
024 pico.addComponent(A.class);
025
026 /* This is a workaround for the bug described further down. Normally
027 * this method call should only be needed if specific requirements for
028 * parameters exist, but not if PicoContainer shall resolve the
029 * dependencies itself. However, with ImplementationHidingPicoContainer
030 * this is currently the only way to register a class/interface such
031 * that the automatic resolution works.
032 */
033 pico.addComponent(I1.class, B.class);
034
035 /* The following addAdapter(Object, Class) of
036 * ImplementationHidingPicoContainer is buggy, as it contains
037 * "ComponentAdapter delegate = componentFactory.createComponentAdapter(componentKey,
038 * componentImplementation, new Parameter[0]);". Instead of "new
039 * Parameter[0]" it should be "null" to have a behaviour consistent to
040 * DefaultPicoContainer, i.e. if PicoContainer shall resolve
041 * dependencies itself.
042 */
043 pico.addComponent(I2.class, C.class);
044
045 /* The following verify() throws the exception, but is expected not to
046 * throw: "org.picocontainer.PicoVerificationException:
047 * [[org.picocontainer.PicoCompositionException: Either do the
048 * specified parameters not match any of the following constructors:
049 * [public PicoContainerBugTest$C(PicoContainerBugTest$A)] or the
050 * constructors were not accessible for 'class
051 * PicoContainerBugTest$C']]".
052 *
053 * I believe that the error comes this way: In method
054 * getGreediestSatisfiableConstructor parameters are checked against
055 * null and if parameters is not null it is assumed that specific
056 * parameters have been given so that no automatic resolution takes
057 * place. As now during registration instead of "null" falsly "new
058 * Parameter[0]" was stored, this is now interpreted as if only the
059 * nullary constructor shall be used, and if that doesn't exist, the
060 * exception is thrown.
061 */
062 new VerifyingVisitor().traverse(pico);
063 }
064
065 public static interface I1 {
066 }
067
068 public static interface I2 {
069 }
070
071 public static class A {
072 public A() {
073 }
074 }
075
076 public static class B implements I1 {
077 public B(final A a) {
078 }
079 }
080
081 public static class C implements I2 {
082 public C(final A a) {
083 }
084 }
085 }