Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Feb 26, 2023. It is now read-only.

Conversation

@Artyomcool
Copy link

Hi,

I have already described my intention in pull request #780, but just realized that the I've pull-requested directly from the develop branch.

@DayS
Copy link
Contributor

DayS commented Nov 22, 2013

I'm not sure if it's overkill or not, because the developer should be aware of it's own code. But, why not. It could be useful for a big team :)

However, I'll review this for 3.1.
Note: You should open an issue first for two purposes :

  • discuss about the feature. It could save you some time if we refuse it
  • we prefer to set the milestone on issues and not PR because we can also set a label

@Artyomcool
Copy link
Author

Actually, for big projects with intensive networking and wide set of database operations, like messengers, it is very usefull - you don't need synchronization, volatile, reentrant locks, etc in most cases, but still able to have a good decomposed beans with strong restictions. And yes, for teams greater then 3 developer, it makes much easely to review code for inconsistent operations.
I'm also assuming that this restrictions could be safely removed by proguard (with a little bit of configuration) in production build in order to save some performance.

As for your preferences about opening an issue, of course I'll follow it in the future.

@WonderCsabo
Copy link
Member

👍 on this feature. I just ran into a problem which i could discover much more easily with this.

@Artyomcool
Copy link
Author

ok, I'll make a PR in a few days
23.04.2014 0:36 пользователь "Csaba Kozák" notifications@github.com
написал:

[image: 👍] on this feature. I just ran into a problem which i could
discover much more easily with this.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/791#issuecomment-41092369
.

@DayS
Copy link
Contributor

DayS commented Apr 23, 2014

You just have to update this one :)

@Artyomcool
Copy link
Author

oh, true ))
23.04.2014 10:18 пользователь "Damien" notifications@github.com написал:

You just have to update this one :)


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/791#issuecomment-41128272
.

@Artyomcool
Copy link
Author

I've renewed the PR, please check it out.

…method was modified because of another annotation
@Artyomcool
Copy link
Author

any progress here?

@Artyomcool
Copy link
Author

Guys?

@DayS DayS merged commit 6c6ebfe into androidannotations:develop Jun 8, 2014
@DayS
Copy link
Contributor

DayS commented Jun 8, 2014

Good job 👍 Thanks for this PR

@WonderCsabo
Copy link
Member

I think the new annotations definitely need better JavaDoc and example in it (one even has a TODO comment). Also the wiki should be updated.

@DayS
Copy link
Contributor

DayS commented Jun 8, 2014

Oops I didn't see the TODO in javadoc..

@WonderCsabo
Copy link
Member

@Artyomcool you should add JavaDoc to all your annotations in a follow-up commit. Also wiki pages should be created for these annotations. I would create the wiki, but i never used these feature before, and also i think the creator can understand and explain it most clearly.

@Artyomcool
Copy link
Author

JavaDocs is not my strongest side. But I'll do my bests.

@Artyomcool
Copy link
Author

Please check the #1121 for possible typos and maybe a grammar - I'm not an English native speaker.

@WonderCsabo
Copy link
Member

I updated the wiki page based on your JavaDocs.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants