[cdi-dev] cdi-dev Digest, Vol 49, Issue 13

Werner Keil werner.keil at gmail.com
Wed Dec 17 09:46:23 EST 2014


Fully agree with Pete's assessment.
Unless the (still very experimental and not even used by Co Spec Lead
Oracle anywhere in Java 8;-) new type annotations that are at least in
theory available from Java SE 8 onward were applied, objects are always
mutable

Werner


On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 7:21 PM, <cdi-dev-request at lists.jboss.org> wrote:
>
> Send cdi-dev mailing list submissions to
>         cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         cdi-dev-request at lists.jboss.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         cdi-dev-owner at lists.jboss.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of cdi-dev digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Is the concept of mutable event payload specified
>       (Antoine Sabot-Durand)
>    2. Re: Is the concept of mutable event payload specified
>       (John D. Ament)
>    3. Re: Is the concept of mutable event payload specified (Pete Muir)
>    4. Re: Is the concept of mutable event payload specified
>       (Romain Manni-Bucau)
>    5. Re: Is the concept of mutable event payload specified
>       (Thorben Janssen)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 17:31:32 +0100
> From: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine at sabot-durand.net>
> Subject: [cdi-dev] Is the concept of mutable event payload specified
> To: cdi-dev <cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> Message-ID: <213B41E0-D73F-4CED-95B0-AFB50451B791 at sabot-durand.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi guys,
>
>
> Always working on Async event concept and discussion around mutable
> payloads. I was looking where in the spec we specified the fact that fired
> payload are mutable. I red-read chapter 10  (
> http://docs.jboss.org/cdi/spec/1.2/cdi-spec.html#events <
> http://docs.jboss.org/cdi/spec/1.2/cdi-spec.html#events>) twice and
> didn?t found. I also browsed JIRA and TCK to find any ref to this feature
> and found nothing. On the other hand it is not specified that payload
> should be immutable ;)
>
> I?d be happy if some of you could have a look and see if I missed
> something.
>
> If I?m not wrong, the mutable payload we (including myself) advertise in
> CDI is a non portable feature (I?m the firs surprised here). So I propose
> that :
>
> 1) We decide to write something in the specification about allowing or
> forbidding it (I know some people not happy with this mix between observer
> and visitor pattern)
> 1bis) Should we decide to forbid it by default, we should provide an
> alternative mode to allow people using this unspecified feature
> 2) Forbid it for fireAsync()
>
>
> Thanks for your feedback and your correction if I missed the feature in
> the spec.
>
> Antoine
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20141216/6aef8552/attachment-0001.html
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 495 bytes
> Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
> Url :
> http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20141216/6aef8552/attachment-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 16:44:37 +0000
> From: "John D. Ament" <john.d.ament at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Is the concept of mutable event payload
>         specified
> To: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine at sabot-durand.net>,    cdi-dev
>         <cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> Message-ID:
>         <CAOqetn_YKLsDMC9Rp=
> DVAUYPoaRoAm_Edp31-nXQM9r8rhVQ4w at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> What's the issue w/ fire async and mutable payload?  Non-deterministic
> behavior depending on thread?
>
> On Tue Dec 16 2014 at 11:32:53 AM Antoine Sabot-Durand <
> antoine at sabot-durand.net> wrote:
>
> > Hi guys,
> >
> >
> > Always working on Async event concept and discussion around mutable
> > payloads. I was looking where in the spec we specified the fact that
> fired
> > payload are mutable. I red-read chapter 10  (
> > http://docs.jboss.org/cdi/spec/1.2/cdi-spec.html#events) twice and
> didn?t
> > found. I also browsed JIRA and TCK to find any ref to this feature and
> > found nothing. On the other hand it is not specified that payload should
> be
> > immutable ;)
> >
> > I?d be happy if some of you could have a look and see if I missed
> > something.
> >
> > If I?m not wrong, the mutable payload we (including myself) advertise in
> > CDI is a non portable feature (I?m the firs surprised here). So I propose
> > that :
> >
> > 1) We decide to write something in the specification about allowing or
> > forbidding it (I know some people not happy with this mix between
> observer
> > and visitor pattern)
> > 1bis) Should we decide to forbid it by default, we should provide an
> > alternative mode to allow people using this unspecified feature
> > 2) Forbid it for fireAsync()
> >
> >
> > Thanks for your feedback and your correction if I missed the feature in
> > the spec.
> >
> > Antoine
> > _______________________________________________
> > cdi-dev mailing list
> > cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> >
> > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> > code under the Apache License, Version 2 (http://www.apache.org/
> > licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas provided on this list,
> > the provider waives all patent and other intellectual property rights
> > inherent in such information.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20141216/81b4a0a5/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 17:39:19 +0000
> From: Pete Muir <pmuir at redhat.com>
> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Is the concept of mutable event payload
>         specified
> To: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine at sabot-durand.net>
> Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> Message-ID: <E83F9043-AB42-45A8-B9DC-9853685F761B at redhat.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I don?t think it?s specified. As objects are, by default in Java, mutable,
> I would assume that payloads are implicitly mutable.
>
> > On 16 Dec 2014, at 16:31, Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine at sabot-durand.net>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi guys,
> >
> >
> > Always working on Async event concept and discussion around mutable
> payloads. I was looking where in the spec we specified the fact that fired
> payload are mutable. I red-read chapter 10  (
> http://docs.jboss.org/cdi/spec/1.2/cdi-spec.html#events <
> http://docs.jboss.org/cdi/spec/1.2/cdi-spec.html#events>) twice and
> didn?t found. I also browsed JIRA and TCK to find any ref to this feature
> and found nothing. On the other hand it is not specified that payload
> should be immutable ;)
> >
> > I?d be happy if some of you could have a look and see if I missed
> something.
> >
> > If I?m not wrong, the mutable payload we (including myself) advertise in
> CDI is a non portable feature (I?m the firs surprised here). So I propose
> that :
> >
> > 1) We decide to write something in the specification about allowing or
> forbidding it (I know some people not happy with this mix between observer
> and visitor pattern)
> > 1bis) Should we decide to forbid it by default, we should provide an
> alternative mode to allow people using this unspecified feature
> > 2) Forbid it for fireAsync()
> >
> >
> > Thanks for your feedback and your correction if I missed the feature in
> the spec.
> >
> > Antoine
> > _______________________________________________
> > cdi-dev mailing list
> > cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> >
> > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> code under the Apache License, Version 2 (
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> intellectual property rights inherent in such information.
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20141216/00b88212/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 18:46:50 +0100
> From: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Is the concept of mutable event payload
>         specified
> To: Pete Muir <pmuir at redhat.com>
> Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> Message-ID:
>         <CACLE=7PfznX0Qq6HbkUdh999NRBFYgLRcapNBLKn=
> wOmPEO9Xw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Hi Antoine,
>
> why isn't it portable?
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-16 18:39 GMT+01:00 Pete Muir <pmuir at redhat.com>:
> > I don?t think it?s specified. As objects are, by default in Java,
> mutable, I
> > would assume that payloads are implicitly mutable.
> >
> > On 16 Dec 2014, at 16:31, Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine at sabot-durand.net
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > Hi guys,
> >
> >
> > Always working on Async event concept and discussion around mutable
> > payloads. I was looking where in the spec we specified the fact that
> fired
> > payload are mutable. I red-read chapter 10
> > (http://docs.jboss.org/cdi/spec/1.2/cdi-spec.html#events) twice and
> didn?t
> > found. I also browsed JIRA and TCK to find any ref to this feature and
> found
> > nothing. On the other hand it is not specified that payload should be
> > immutable ;)
> >
> > I?d be happy if some of you could have a look and see if I missed
> something.
> >
> > If I?m not wrong, the mutable payload we (including myself) advertise in
> CDI
> > is a non portable feature (I?m the firs surprised here). So I propose
> that :
> >
> > 1) We decide to write something in the specification about allowing or
> > forbidding it (I know some people not happy with this mix between
> observer
> > and visitor pattern)
> > 1bis) Should we decide to forbid it by default, we should provide an
> > alternative mode to allow people using this unspecified feature
> > 2) Forbid it for fireAsync()
> >
> >
> > Thanks for your feedback and your correction if I missed the feature in
> the
> > spec.
> >
> > Antoine
> > _______________________________________________
> > cdi-dev mailing list
> > cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> >
> > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> code
> > under the Apache License, Version 2
> > (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> > provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> intellectual
> > property rights inherent in such information.
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cdi-dev mailing list
> > cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> >
> > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> code
> > under the Apache License, Version 2
> > (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> > provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> intellectual
> > property rights inherent in such information.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 19:21:48 +0100
> From: Thorben Janssen <thjanssen123 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Is the concept of mutable event payload
>         specified
> To: cdi-dev <cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> Message-ID:
>         <CAE9nDy-o=
> PHg++iQ4vr8ymEm0eH0zEabbHLWf7U-_cX_zBmZYQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> We should be careful with making the payload imutable. I know of several
> applications (and companies) that change the payload to send some
> information back to to the event producer.
> We shouldn't break these apps, if we can solve it in a different way.
>
> --
> *Thorben Janssen*
>
> @thjanssen123 <https://twitter.com/thjanssen123>
> www.thoughts-on-java.org
>
> 2014-12-16 18:46 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau at gmail.com>:
> >
> > Hi Antoine,
> >
> > why isn't it portable?
> >
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> > https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >
> >
> > 2014-12-16 18:39 GMT+01:00 Pete Muir <pmuir at redhat.com>:
> > > I don?t think it?s specified. As objects are, by default in Java,
> > mutable, I
> > > would assume that payloads are implicitly mutable.
> > >
> > > On 16 Dec 2014, at 16:31, Antoine Sabot-Durand <
> antoine at sabot-durand.net
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi guys,
> > >
> > >
> > > Always working on Async event concept and discussion around mutable
> > > payloads. I was looking where in the spec we specified the fact that
> > fired
> > > payload are mutable. I red-read chapter 10
> > > (http://docs.jboss.org/cdi/spec/1.2/cdi-spec.html#events) twice and
> > didn?t
> > > found. I also browsed JIRA and TCK to find any ref to this feature and
> > found
> > > nothing. On the other hand it is not specified that payload should be
> > > immutable ;)
> > >
> > > I?d be happy if some of you could have a look and see if I missed
> > something.
> > >
> > > If I?m not wrong, the mutable payload we (including myself) advertise
> in
> > CDI
> > > is a non portable feature (I?m the firs surprised here). So I propose
> > that :
> > >
> > > 1) We decide to write something in the specification about allowing or
> > > forbidding it (I know some people not happy with this mix between
> > observer
> > > and visitor pattern)
> > > 1bis) Should we decide to forbid it by default, we should provide an
> > > alternative mode to allow people using this unspecified feature
> > > 2) Forbid it for fireAsync()
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks for your feedback and your correction if I missed the feature in
> > the
> > > spec.
> > >
> > > Antoine
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > cdi-dev mailing list
> > > cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> > >
> > > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> > code
> > > under the Apache License, Version 2
> > > (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> > > provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> > intellectual
> > > property rights inherent in such information.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > cdi-dev mailing list
> > > cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> > >
> > > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> > code
> > > under the Apache License, Version 2
> > > (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> > > provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> > intellectual
> > > property rights inherent in such information.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cdi-dev mailing list
> > cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> >
> > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> > code under the Apache License, Version 2 (
> > http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> > provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> > intellectual property rights inherent in such information.
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20141216/f74fbdb4/attachment.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> cdi-dev mailing list
> cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
>
> Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> code under the Apache License, Version 2 (
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html).  For all other ideas
> provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> intellectual property rights inherent in such information.
>
> End of cdi-dev Digest, Vol 49, Issue 13
> ***************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20141217/fb48f43d/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the cdi-dev mailing list