Sting is a fast, easy to use, compile-time dependency injection toolkit.
If you are familiar with Dagger, it is a replacement for Dagger that is
more optimized for the web context and GWT/J2CL.
We have been developing Sting for a while as we were not satisfied with
existing solutions but we have recently reached a point where we have
replaced all of our existing dependency injection solutions (GIN,
Dagger2 and some home-grown variants) with Sting and we think it is
ready for other people to give it a try. So we are looking for feedback
from anyone who is interested in giving it a try.
We have set up a documentation site at
https://sting-ioc.github.io/docs/overview.html
But to get a feel for what the code looks like. A component is
defined by adding the @Injectable annotation to the class such as:
@Injectable
class MyFancyService { ... }
However, we also support a @Named annotation and @Typed annotation
that is similar in practice to the same-named annotations in CDI
applications that add a qualifier to a component or control the types
with which a component is published. We also support an @Eager
annotation to ensure a component is instantiated when the injector is
constructed.
We also have the equivalent of daggers modules in the form of
fragments where you can programmatically create components by writing
code such as GWT.create(MyBackendServiceAsync.class)
So why choose Sting over something like Dagger? We did write up a
comparison at
https://sting-ioc.github.io/docs/dagger.html
However, it is a little blunt and I will probably soften the points in
it a little (it was written for an internal audience initially).
The main reason to adopt Sting is that it is easier to use and it
produces smaller, faster and easier to optimize code.
Anyhoo, if anyone is looking for a dependency injection framework,
here is another to try and we would really appreciate the feedback.
Thanks,
Peter Donald
-- If you are familiar with Dagger, it is a replacement for Dagger that is
more optimized for the web context and GWT/J2CL.
We have been developing Sting for a while as we were not satisfied with
existing solutions but we have recently reached a point where we have
replaced all of our existing dependency injection solutions (GIN,
Dagger2 and some home-grown variants) with Sting and we think it is
ready for other people to give it a try. So we are looking for feedback
from anyone who is interested in giving it a try.
We have set up a documentation site at
https://sting-ioc.github.io/docs/overview.html
But to get a feel for what the code looks like. A component is
defined by adding the @Injectable annotation to the class such as:
@Injectable
class MyFancyService { ... }
However, we also support a @Named annotation and @Typed annotation
that is similar in practice to the same-named annotations in CDI
applications that add a qualifier to a component or control the types
with which a component is published. We also support an @Eager
annotation to ensure a component is instantiated when the injector is
constructed.
We also have the equivalent of daggers modules in the form of
fragments where you can programmatically create components by writing
code such as GWT.create(MyBackendServiceAsync.class)
So why choose Sting over something like Dagger? We did write up a
comparison at
https://sting-ioc.github.io/docs/dagger.html
However, it is a little blunt and I will probably soften the points in
it a little (it was written for an internal audience initially).
The main reason to adopt Sting is that it is easier to use and it
produces smaller, faster and easier to optimize code.
Anyhoo, if anyone is looking for a dependency injection framework,
here is another to try and we would really appreciate the feedback.
Thanks,
Peter Donald
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit/CACiKNc5PTU7vEhLJvLdUx67xtJaHVQkQrpW3d2vwOKaYpbu3gA%40mail.gmail.com.
