So does that mean I never can rely on injecting, and must always have a
insurance of default injectable interface implementation in my code?
2010/5/27 Andrus Adamchik <andru..bjectstyle.org>
> Not to the unit tests inheriting from CayenneCase and friends. Unit tests
> were always bootstrapped in their own way, even in the past (mostly for
> performance reasons). However if you need to define mock services, etc. via
> IoC this can be done with a great deal of flexibility. E.g. see
> DataDomainProviderTest.java, DefaultDataSourceFactoryLoaderTest.java and
> other tests in the same package.
>
> Andrus
>
>
>
>
> On May 27, 2010, at 9:21 AM, Andrey Razumovsky wrote:
>
> Hi Andrus,
>>
>> Are new 3.1 DI "modules" (CayenneServerModule) bound to Cayenne bootstrap
>> process? At least, I don't think they are when we're running JUnit tests.
>> Or
>> otherwise, how to "turn on" injecting?
>>
>> --
>> Andrey
>>
>
>
-- Andrey
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Thu May 27 2010 - 07:34:19 UTC