@tbosch would you mind reviewing this one for me?

@mhevery I've added a test you've been mentioning but while doing so I've realized that this is probably not representing the use-case described by @ajoslin . There are 2 differences I can see:

• here we are using meta-data (selectors etc.) from the "PublicAPI" while I think @ajoslin was expecting that a selector would be taken from the impl itself
• the essence of the trick we are playing here that we map a concrete impl (in terms of meta-data) to one concrete implementation. This is a trick that we can play only once per template which probably is not enough for the more advanced use-cases

@ajoslin could you please verify if this commit fixes your use-case or not?

@pkozlowski-opensource Can we merge this anyways? I need it for another issue...

@tbosch merging this won't break anything so in this sense I think we can. But I still believe that this doesn't address the original issue and might be confusing (we read meta-data from one class and use a different class as impl, even if impl has different meta-data).

I would say that we can merge this if we don't mind reviewing the original issue / introducing breaking changes in the near future.

Ok, merged, but leaving the original issue open so that we don't forget...

This issue has been automatically locked due to inactivity.
Please file a new issue if you are encountering a similar or related problem.

Read more about our automatic conversation locking policy.

_{This action has been performed automatically by a bot.}