Code to be migrated to a different codebase (which uses spring):
#Named
public class A {
....
}
public class B {
private final A a;
#Inject
public B (A a) {
...
}
....
}
I know two ways. Do both work? Is there any difference?
Option 1:
#Component (can I label this as a #Bean also?)
public class A {
....
}
public class B {
#Autowired
private final A a;
}
Option 2:
public class A {
...
}
public class B {
private final A a;
public B (A a) {
...
}
}
#Configuration
public class BeanConfig {
#Bean
public A a() {
new A();
}
}
With option 2, do I need to do anything else like #Autowiring the BeanConfig in class B?
I am just starting to learn DI frameworks and this is bit confusing to me.
#Component
#Component is a generic stereotype for any Spring-managed component. You can use #Component across the application to mark the beans as Spring's managed components. #Service and #Repository are special cases of #Component. They are technically the same but you can use them for the different purposes.
#Bean
You can declare beans using the #Bean annotation in a configuration class. Configuration classes can contain bean definition methods annotated with #Bean
Here are the differences which might help you to evaluate your choices between #Component and #Bean:
#Component is used to auto-detect and auto-configure beans using classpath scanning. #Bean is used to explicitly declare a single bean, rather than letting Spring do it automatically.
#Component is a class level annotation whereas #Bean is a method level annotation and name of the method serves as the bean name.
#Component need not to be used with the #Configuration annotation where as #Bean annotation has to be used within the class which is annotated with #Configuration.
Here is an article Migration Guide from Guice to Spring which might interest you.
Related
I am learning concepts of Spring & I came across #Bean & #Component annotations. I want to know what will happen in below scenario:
#Configuration
class ConfigClass {
#Bean
public ComponentClass ComponentClass() {
return new ComponentClass(someDependency1, someDependency2, someDependency3);
}
}
#Component
class ComponentClass{
private SomeDependency1 sd1;
private SomeDependency2 sd2;
private SomeDependency3 sd3;
public ComponentClass(SomeDependency1 sd1, SomeDependency2 sd2, SomeDependency3 sd3) {
/* initialize here */
}
}
I have declared ComponentClass as #Component which means it is a spring bean now. But I have also defined a #Bean for it in config class separately.
Which of these beans will be actually used as by default Spring is singleton?
What happens when I remove #Component?
Spring will notice a mistake and throw NoUniqueBeanDefinitionException during application startup.
If you remove #Component annotation it will work as expected, #Bean will be used for initialization.
I have an interface and service implements it. It has some void methods.
I am using spring java bean configuration. But unable to create bean object because of void methods.How to handle this problem.
I tried to use #PostConstruct instead of #Bean after reading some blogs, but it didn't work out.
public interface MyInterface {
void someData(List<MyClass> list, String somedata);
}
#Service("myInterface")
public DummyClass implements MyInterface {
public void someData(List<MyClass> list, String somedata){
// my business logic
}
}
public AppConfig {
#Bean
public MyInterface myInterface {
return new DummyClass(); // but gives error void cannot return value
}
}
My Junit looks like this
#RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
#ContextConfiguration(
classes = {AppConfig.class},
loader = AnnotationConfigContextLoader.class
)
public class MyTest {
#Autowired
DummyClass dummyClass;
// If I don't use AppConfig and simply autowire then I get
"Error creating bean name, unsatisfied dependency
}
How do I achieve dependency injection here?
Use #Configuration annotation on AppConfig class, with this all the beans defined on this class will be loaded on spring context.
If you use #Service annotation on DummyClass, you do not need to declare #Bean annotation because you are already saying to spring to detect this class for dependency injection. On the other hand use #Bean annotation to specify the instantiation of the class. Normally I let the #Bean to complex classes for dependency injection or to override configurations.
I have such classes and Spring context.
How to fix this wrong Java configuration, not xml?
I'd tried some solutions from other posts, but without success.
#Service
#Transactional
public class XCalculationService implements VoidService<X> {
}
public interface VoidService<Input> {
}
#AllArgsConstructor
public class XService {
private XCalculationService calculationService;
}
#Configuration
public class ServiceConfiguration {
#Bean
public OrderService orderService(XCalculationService calculationService) {
return new XService(calculationService);
}
#Bean
public XCalculationService calculationService() {
return new XCalculationService ();
}
}
Error
BeanNotOfRequiredTypeException: Bean named 'calculationService' is expected to be of type 'com.x.XCalculationService' but was actually of type 'com.sun.proxy.$Proxy
Here is 100% fix:
#EnableTransactionManagement(proxyTargetClass = true)
Java proxies are working on interfaces, not concrete classes.
Reasoning with spring documentation: https://docs.spring.io/spring-framework/docs/3.0.0.M3/reference/html/ch08s06.html
If the target object to be proxied implements at least one interface then a JDK dynamic proxy will be used.
Therefore, when using aspect/proxy based annotations as #Transactional, Spring will attempt to proxify the concrete class and resulting object will be instance of VoidService interface not XCalculationService.
Therefore you can solve it two ways:
use #Arthur solution and turn off Java's interface proxy in favor of CGLib for transaction support
#EnableTransactionManagement(proxyTargetClass = true)
Instead of using XCalculationService type in injectable fields, use only its proxied interface aka VoidService.
I suppose you have got #ComponentScan somewhere activated and it scans your #Service annotated XCalculationService class.
So you should either remove #Service from XCalculationService
or remove
#Bean
public XCalculationService calculationService() {
return new XCalculationService ();
}
from ServiceConfiguration
i am really confused with spring annotations.
where to use # Autowired, where class is # Bean or # Component,
i understand we cannot use
Example example=new Example("String");
in Spring
but how alone
#Autowired
Example example;
will solve the purpose?
what about Example Constructor ,how spring will provide String value to Example Constructor?
i went through one of the article but it does not make much sense to me.
it would be great if some one can give me just brief and simple explanation.
Spring doesn't say you can't do Example example = new Example("String"); That is still perfectly legal if Example does not need to be a singleton bean. Where #Autowired and #Bean come into play is when you want to instantiate a class as a singleton. In Spring, any bean you annotate with #Service, #Component or #Repository would get automatically registered as a singleton bean as long as your component scanning is setup correctly. The option of using #Bean allows you to define these singletons without annotating the classes explicitly. Instead you would create a class, annotate it with #Configuration and within that class, define one or more #Bean definitions.
So instead of
#Component
public class MyService {
public MyService() {}
}
You could have
public class MyService {
public MyService() {}
}
#Configuration
public class Application {
#Bean
public MyService myService() {
return new MyService();
}
#Autowired
#Bean
public MyOtherService myOtherService(MyService myService) {
return new MyOtherService();
}
}
The trade-off is having your beans defined in one place vs annotating individual classes. I typically use both depending on what I need.
You will first define a bean of type example:
<beans>
<bean name="example" class="Example">
<constructor-arg value="String">
</bean>
</beans>
or in Java code as:
#Bean
public Example example() {
return new Example("String");
}
Now when you use #Autowired the spring container will inject the bean created above into the parent bean.
Default constructor + #Component - Annotation is enough to get #Autowired work:
#Component
public class Example {
public Example(){
this.str = "string";
}
}
You should never instantiate a concrete implementation via #Bean declaration. Always do something like this:
public interface MyApiInterface{
void doSomeOperation();
}
#Component
public class MyApiV1 implements MyApiInterface {
public void doSomeOperation() {...}
}
And now you can use it in your code:
#Autowired
private MyApiInterface _api; // spring will AUTOmaticaly find the implementation
I recently started working at a place that uses Java configuration for Spring as opposed to XML and so far I'm loving it.
My question is the following:
If we have a #Configuration annotated class A that imports another #Configuration annotated class B, what is the proper, type-safe way for a bean defined in A to depend on a bean defined in B.
Here's an example I saw in a blog (https://blog.codecentric.de/en/2012/07/spring-dependency-injection-styles-why-i-love-java-based-configuration/):
#Configuration
public class PartnerConfig {
#Bean
public PartnerService partnerService() {
return new PartnerServiceImpl();
}
}
#Configuration
#Import(PartnerConfig.class)
public class CashingConfig {
#Autowired
private PartnerConfig partnerConfig;
#Bean
public CashingService cashingService() {
return new CashingServiceImpl(partnerConfig.partnerService());
}
}
As a second part to my question, if I was to do the above, would Spring interpret as a bean dependency? That is, when I do
partnerConfig.partnerService()
in the example above, am I getting Spring to fetch me the partnerService bean, or am I just calling a regular java method and creating a new instance of the PartherService (which is NOT what I want, since the bean should be a singleton) ?
EDIT:
It has been suggested to use a #Qualifier. Would this work?
#Configuration
public class PartnerConfig {
#Bean
#MyCustomQualifier
public PartnerService partnerService() {
return new PartnerServiceImpl();
}
}
#Configuration
#Import(PartnerConfig.class)
public class CashingConfig {
#Bean
public CashingService cashingService(#MyCustomQualifier PartnerService partnerService) {
return new CashingServiceImpl(partnerService);
}
}
I recommend giving the docs a read: http://docs.spring.io/spring/docs/current/javadoc-api/org/springframework/context/annotation/Bean.html
Refer to the section:
#Bean Methods in #Configuration Classes
This sums it up very well.
Typically, #Bean methods are declared within #Configuration classes. In this case, bean methods may reference other #Bean methods in the same class by calling them directly. This ensures that references between beans are strongly typed and navigable.
Also take a look at: http://docs.spring.io/spring-framework/docs/current/javadoc-api/org/springframework/context/annotation/Configuration.html
Section:
Composing #Configuration classes
Just add the dependency as an argument to the #Bean annotated method and remove the autowiring of the configuration.
#Configuration
#Import(PartnerConfig.class)
public class CashingConfig {
#Bean
public CashingService cashingService(PartnerService partnerService) {
return new CashingServiceImpl(partnerService);
}
}
or simply autowire the PartnerService instead of the configuration.
#Configuration
#Import(PartnerConfig.class)
public class CashingConfig {
#Autowire
private PartnerService partnerService;
#Bean
public CashingService cashingService() {
return new CashingServiceImpl(partnerService);
}
}