XML based VS Anotations based Configuration OR MIX?

[eros]

what would you prefer for your configuration?
transactional best for annotations...?
xml based best because of visibility and gives the outline...?
how about the pros & cons...? metadata? time compiling? and other aspects that may help us to develop vast features Spring Applications...

XML based
- external configuration files

OR

Annotations
- source code level configuration

OR

MIX (Usage: maybe XML > Annotations or Annotations > XML)
- somewhere in the configuration that best for xml and annotations

my opinion is the two configuration files are different in a way that the annotations are compile time and xml based is run time... but main goals are the same...

[Marten Deinum]

The annotations aren't compile time, they are scanned runtime and dependencies are injected accordingly.

I like XML because you now have 1 location (or a few if you spread your configuration) where your configuration (application blueprint) is stored. With annotations those are scattered around the place. For the web stuff I mainly uses a mix between annotations and xml, course grained mapping is done in xml and fine grained in the classes.

[eros]

yes it is, Annotations are scanned at runtime..

my opinion is the two configuration files are different in a way that the annotations are compile time and xml based is run time... but main goals are the same...

i gave wrong/lack of description in the above...sorry
i mean, with the aspect of changing the configuration ..
because annotations are with the compiled class, may not able to change it..
while the xml based, may able to...

For the web stuff I mainly uses a mix between annotations and xml, course grained mapping is done in xml and fine grained in the classes.

please correct me if im wrong,,,
loosely coupled components are coarse grained, while tightly coupled components are more likely to be fine grained.

e.g.
services -> coarse grained
dao object -> fine grained

[Marten Deinum]

With coarse grained I meant the url mapping.

in xml map all requests to account controller

<entry key="/account/*" value=ref="accountController" />

in annotations

@RequestMapping("index")
public void index() {}

That way you have your coarse grained URL mapping in xml and the fine grained in Annotations.

loosely coupled components are coarse grained, while tightly coupled components are more likely to be fine grained.

I have no clue on what you mean with this nor do I think it holds...

[Hetal B]

XML based configurations are easier to maintain since the configuration is at one place. From a project maintenance perspective as well.

Easily from a single file you can find out the validators, the command objects etc from a single simple xml whereas the same becomes tedious to locate if its done using annotations.

-Hetal

[Tomiito]

I like xmls because i can have multiple configurations of my application to distinc environments in one place... This is more easy to see.

But i think that the transactions annotations do the things more simple that configure one to one every method.