[cdi-dev] do we like to define a DeploymentException type?
struberg at yahoo.de
Sat Jun 16 07:18:10 EDT 2012
Yes, was thinking in the same direction. We would still need to do this container specific detection for CDI-1.0 containers, but at least we would get a well defined behaviour for CDI-1.1.
This would take a while until getting picked up though, as most Extensions will also aim to run on CDI-1.0 for a long time ...
----- Original Message -----
> From: Jason Porter <lightguard.jp at gmail.com>
> To: Mark Struberg <struberg at yahoo.de>
> Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> Sent: Friday, June 15, 2012 5:31 PM
> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] do we like to define a DeploymentException type?
> Having CDI define (even one) exception would be nice and would make testing
> extensions for portability much easier. As it currently stands you have to test
> for implementation specific exceptions.
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 15, 2012, at 1:48, Mark Struberg <struberg at yahoo.de> wrote:
>> While reviewing the DeltaSpike MessageBundleExtension, I (again) came to
> the point where I didn't knew which Exception to take.
>> It might be nice to have a DeploymentException which indicates that a CDI
> Extension detected a logical problem which is _not_ caused by some technical
>> E.g. if a certain annotation must not be used in conjunction with another
> one. In our case @MessageBundle must only be used on Interfaces. We collect all
> those problems during ProcessAnnotatedType and add them as
>> A well defined DeploymentException could help indicating such
> 'logical' problems, wdyt?
>> cdi-dev mailing list
>> cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
More information about the cdi-dev