From kevinb9n on February 28, 2007 11:06:03

I like the intent -- discoverable default implementations -- but I'm not sure I like
the means.  Interface containing a hard reference to implementation just strikes me
as not very guicy.  We discussed once the idea of a package annotation which you
would use on the package containing the interfaces, which would identify a class that
implements Module, and I kind of think it should identify it by a relative String
("impl/FooModule") even though I know that's crappy.  Let's discuss further?

From crazyboblee on February 28, 2007 12:22:20

Yeah, I probably won't implement this right away, so there's plenty of time to
discuss. Like I said, I'm not exactly worried about the compile time dependency. This
feature is just for people who want the maximum brevity and only care about the
remaining benefits of using interfaces, particular to unit testing.

From crazyboblee on February 28, 2007 14:45:40

Let's go ahead and get this in so we can get some experience with it.

Labels: 1.0RC3

From crazyboblee on March 01, 2007 13:50:07

Added in rev 251.

Status: Fixed