Good evening 🙂

I'm torn between two fun things - implementing more feature into my editor or testing out the batch of D1 mini I had delivered today.... https://www.wemos.cc/product/d1-mini.html Oh, such problems! 😛

I think I'll do some H/W to start with, then some late-night coding (that's the best coding-time, anyway!)

@permalmberg that is a nice problem to have.

@permalmberg Is it easy to control from Java?

@edvin thanks for the

reloadStylesheetsOnFocus()

functionality. It helps out tremendously.

@jchildress: Yeah, some things are just too tedious to do if you have to restart for every little change :)

@edvin Easy? Well, it depends on what firmware you put into it. I'll be using MQTT to communicate with it

Ah 🙂

I'm looking at a way for a component to say that it always want to recide in a specific scope. It's very handy for MDI where you have some things form part of one document, but other resources should be global. Instead of having to mention the

DefaultScope

when you inject those truly global resources, you could just configure them to have a fixed scope.

If you want to force the scope for a component, you can now declare it like this:

class MyController : Controller(DefaultScope)

. Even if you look it up form another scope, you'll get the one from the

DefaultScope

.

@edvin that's the typical usecase for DI like Guice or Spring

you can either store the extra info with the class as an annotation or part of the hierarchy or a separate DI module that explains the object scope for each object type or each named object

ex, all stateless model objects are singleton...cohesive object graphs will be scoped...prototype would be knock-off objects

the two Fragment example we went over on the video (CustomerApp) is the perfect case for needing scope if multiple stages showing these components were to be displayed. Both should have the same scoped ViewModel. They can't have singleton because the different stages show different data. They can't have prototype or instance scope because then there would be multiple ViewModels per fragment pair

maybe allow for an optional module{} builder that overrides the default scoping? ex module { MainViewScope { CustomerView::class,

CustomerListFragment::class,

}}

CustomerDetailsFragment::class

Interesting.. I just found a flaw in my current design, so I need to change it anyway.

I like that.

i think the convention over config is good...simple apps shouldn't need extra specifiers to get the default scoping

then, maybe as a builder for App, you load in a config{} block for module scoping. i think you'll lack that better than annotations

I have a chicken/egg thing going with my current non-solution. I either need annotations or something like you're proposing anyways I think. Hang on, checking.

Yeah, there is no way to do what I tried to do with my approach. Hmm...

I like your approach.

It means that a component could potentially be reused in another app with a different scope config.

yeah. i guice i use a name to disambiguate. something like this class MyApp : App(MyView::class) { modules { scopes { CustomerStageScope { CustomerView::class,

Singleton { CustomerModel:class

There would be no way to support that exact syntax. The first

modules

call would have to be inside

init

, or we'd have to do

override val modules

or something.