[seam-dev] Stateless scope

[Pete Muir]

Agreed. And we can't use a pseudo-scope, as then there is no proxy.

I guess we have to introduce a dependency on javassist for this then.

On 8 Jun 2010, at 11:09, Stuart Douglas wrote:

> <stateless-scope.diff>
> 
> I just tried to implement this and it did not work, and after looking at the spec even if it did work I don't think it would be portable due to the following language:
> 
> Suppose beans A, B and Z all have normal scopes. Suppose A has an injection point x, and B has an injection point y. Suppose
> further that both x and y resolve to bean Z according to the rules of typesafe resolution. If a is the current instance of
> A, and b is the current instance of B, then both a.x and b.y refer to the same instance of Z. This instance is the current instance
> of Z.
> 
> 
> 
> The other way of providing this is to provide an extension that uses javassist to create @Dependent scoped proxies, these proxies could then call the producer method on every invocation, however it requires a dependency on javassist.
> 
> 
> Stuart
> 
> On 08/06/2010, at 3:19 AM, Pete Muir wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On 7 Jun 2010, at 12:19, Stuart Douglas wrote:
>> 
>>> I have been thinking about adding a stateless scope to weld extensions, that would allow for a similar construct to @Unwrap from seam 2. Basically if you have a Stateless producer method the the producer will be called every time a method on the proxy is invoked. 
>>> 
>>> The main downside that I can see is that beans that have a stateless scope no longer have a well defined lifecycle, so disposal methods etc will not be called, however as long as this is documented I don't think that this is much of a problem.
>> 
>> Yeah, I think there is a strong case for providing this.
>