January 2014 - cdi-dev - Jboss List Archives

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-381) Additional implementations of Request Context

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-381?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand commented on CDI-381: ------------------------------------------ Javadoc should be updated to be more open > Additional implementations of Request Context > --------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-381 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-381 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Clarification > Reporter: Joseph Snyder > Priority: Minor > Fix For: 1.2 Proposed > > > Suppose another spec wanted to define when @RequestScoped applied to its > operations, how would it do that? The javadocs for @RequestScoped seem to > be an exhaustive list, not allowing the scope to be used in other contexts. > The javadocs need to indicate that the scope can be active at other > times beyond what the spec describes. It can be tricky to do that in a > way that doesn't allow people to implement the currently defined scopes > incorrectly. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

10 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-382) Clarify interceptors are not associated with the result of a producer method/field

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-382?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand updated CDI-382: ------------------------------------- Labels: CDI_spec_chge Ready_to_fix (was: ) > Clarify interceptors are not associated with the result of a producer method/field > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-382 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-382 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Clarification > Components: Interceptors > Affects Versions: 1.1.PFD > Reporter: Martin Kouba > Labels: CDI_spec_chge, Ready_to_fix > Fix For: 1.2 Proposed > > > The interceptors part from CDI-59 resolution [1] is missing in the final version of the spec, probably lost during the Interceptors section transfer to the Interceptors 1.2 spec. > [1] https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi/pull/110 > "Interceptors are not associated with the return value of a producer method or the current value of a producer field." -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

10 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-386) Two examples in section 5.2.4 contradict the rules of the same section

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-386?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand updated CDI-386: ------------------------------------- Labels: Ready_to_fix (was: ) > Two examples in section 5.2.4 contradict the rules of the same section > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-386 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-386 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Bug > Affects Versions: 1.1.PFD > Reporter: Marko Lukša > Assignee: Marko Lukša > Labels: Ready_to_fix > Fix For: 1.2 Proposed > > > The examples in section 5.2.4 state that bean {{Dao<T extends Persistent>}} is eligible for injection into both {{Dao<Order>}} and {{Dao<User>}}, but according to the rules stated in the same section this isn't true. > Also note that the spec doesn't state explicitly that {{Order extends Persistent}} and {{User extends Persistent}}. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

10 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-386) Two examples in section 5.2.4 contradict the rules of the same section

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-386?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand commented on CDI-386: ------------------------------------------ Resolve with CDI-389 > Two examples in section 5.2.4 contradict the rules of the same section > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-386 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-386 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Bug > Affects Versions: 1.1.PFD > Reporter: Marko Lukša > Assignee: Marko Lukša > Fix For: 1.2 Proposed > > > The examples in section 5.2.4 state that bean {{Dao<T extends Persistent>}} is eligible for injection into both {{Dao<Order>}} and {{Dao<User>}}, but according to the rules stated in the same section this isn't true. > Also note that the spec doesn't state explicitly that {{Order extends Persistent}} and {{User extends Persistent}}. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

10 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-388) Session bean specialization example is not valid

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-388?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand updated CDI-388: ------------------------------------- Labels: CDI_spec_chge Ready_to_fix (was: CDI_spec_chge) > Session bean specialization example is not valid > ------------------------------------------------ > > Key: CDI-388 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-388 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Bug > Reporter: Martin Kouba > Labels: CDI_spec_chge, Ready_to_fix > Fix For: 1.2 Proposed > > > {code} > @Stateless > public class LoginActionBean implements LoginAction { ... } > @Stateless @Mock @Specializes > public class MockLoginActionBean extends LoginActionBean { ... } > {code} > {{LoginAction}} is a local interface (whether it's annotated with {{@Local}} or not) therefore the bean types of {{LoginActionBean}} are {{LoginAction}}, {{Object}}. On the other hand {{MockLoginActionBean}} does not have a local interface (client views exposed by a particular session bean are not inherited by a subclass; see also the EJB spec 4.9.2.1 Session Bean Superclasses). Therefore the bean types of {{MockLoginActionBean}} are {{MockLoginActionBean}}, {{LoginActionBean}} and {{Object}} (3.2.2 Bean types of a session bean: "the unrestricted set of bean types contains the bean class and all superclasses"). > The spec also states (4.3.1 Direct and indirect specialization): > {quote} > Furthermore, X must have all the bean types of Y. If X does not have some bean type of Y, the container automatically detects the problem and treats it as a definition error. > {quote} > So I believe the aforementioned example should result in a definition exception. To make it valid the {{MockLoginActionBean}} should also implement {{LoginAction}}. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

10 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-388) Session bean specialization example is not valid

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-388?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand updated CDI-388: ------------------------------------- Labels: CDI_spec_chge (was: ) > Session bean specialization example is not valid > ------------------------------------------------ > > Key: CDI-388 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-388 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Bug > Reporter: Martin Kouba > Labels: CDI_spec_chge > Fix For: 1.2 Proposed > > > {code} > @Stateless > public class LoginActionBean implements LoginAction { ... } > @Stateless @Mock @Specializes > public class MockLoginActionBean extends LoginActionBean { ... } > {code} > {{LoginAction}} is a local interface (whether it's annotated with {{@Local}} or not) therefore the bean types of {{LoginActionBean}} are {{LoginAction}}, {{Object}}. On the other hand {{MockLoginActionBean}} does not have a local interface (client views exposed by a particular session bean are not inherited by a subclass; see also the EJB spec 4.9.2.1 Session Bean Superclasses). Therefore the bean types of {{MockLoginActionBean}} are {{MockLoginActionBean}}, {{LoginActionBean}} and {{Object}} (3.2.2 Bean types of a session bean: "the unrestricted set of bean types contains the bean class and all superclasses"). > The spec also states (4.3.1 Direct and indirect specialization): > {quote} > Furthermore, X must have all the bean types of Y. If X does not have some bean type of Y, the container automatically detects the problem and treats it as a definition error. > {quote} > So I believe the aforementioned example should result in a definition exception. To make it valid the {{MockLoginActionBean}} should also implement {{LoginAction}}. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

10 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-389) Revert CDI-85

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-389?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand updated CDI-389: ------------------------------------- Labels: CDI_spec_chge Ready_to_fix (was: ) > Revert CDI-85 > ------------- > > Key: CDI-389 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-389 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Bug > Affects Versions: 1.1.PFD > Reporter: Marko Lukša > Labels: CDI_spec_chge, Ready_to_fix > Fix For: 1.2 Proposed > > > Bullet 4 of section 5.2.4 should be reverted back from: > {quote} > the required type parameter is an actual type, the bean type parameter is a type variable and the actual type is assignable *from* > the upper bound, if any, of the type variable, or > {quote} > to > {quote} > the required type parameter is an actual type, the bean type parameter is a type variable and the actual type is assignable *to* > the upper bound, if any, of the type variable, or > {quote} > See discussion at http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/2013-July/004290.html -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

10 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-392) Clarify when the operations of BeanManager can be called

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-392?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand updated CDI-392: ------------------------------------- Labels: CDI_spec_chge Ready_to_fix (was: ) > Clarify when the operations of BeanManager can be called > -------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-392 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-392 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Clarification > Reporter: Matus Abaffy > Labels: CDI_spec_chge, Ready_to_fix > Fix For: 1.2 Proposed > > > The current version of spec. states (under 11.3. The BeanManager object): "Any operation of BeanManager may be called at any time during the execution of the application." > This sentence is likely to be misinterpreted (see WELD-1453). Pointing out that BeanManager's methods can be called (without causing exception) just after AfterDeploymentValidation event is fired might be helpful. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

10 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-397) Clarify Section 6.6.3 regarding singletons

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-397?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand updated CDI-397: ------------------------------------- Labels: CDI_spec_chge Ready_to_fix (was: ) > Clarify Section 6.6.3 regarding singletons > ------------------------------------------ > > Key: CDI-397 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-397 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Clarification > Affects Versions: 1.1.FD > Reporter: Jozef Hartinger > Priority: Minor > Labels: CDI_spec_chge, Ready_to_fix > Fix For: 1.2 Proposed > > > The section 6.6.3 Passivation capable dependencies states: > {quote} > all singleton beans are passivation capable dependencies > {quote} > Clearly the specification intents to address *singleton session beans* but the current wording does not make that explicit and users confuse this line and consider javax.inject.Singleton-scoped beans also to be passivation capable dependencies. > The spec should instead say that: > {quote} > all singleton *session* beans are passivation capable dependencies > {quote} -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

10 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-398) Clarify that an array with a variable component type or parameterized component type containing wildcards is not a valid bean type

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-398?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand updated CDI-398: ------------------------------------- Labels: CDI_spec_chge Ready_to_fix (was: ) > Clarify that an array with a variable component type or parameterized component type containing wildcards is not a valid bean type > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-398 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-398 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Beans > Affects Versions: 1.1.PFD > Reporter: Marko Lukša > Labels: CDI_spec_chge, Ready_to_fix > Fix For: 1.2 Proposed > > > Section 2.2.1 says: > {quote} > Almost any Java type may be a bean type of a bean: > • A bean type may be an array type. > {quote} > and: > {quote} > A type variable is not a legal bean type. A parameterized type that contains a wildcard type parameter is not a legal bean type. > {quote} > This should be clarified that array types that have a type variable or a parameterized type that contains a wildcard type parameter as the array's component type are also not legal bean types. > Also, all other sections that mention type variables/wildcards should also be reviewed and, if necessary, updated to also specifically mention array types with these kinds of component types. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

10 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

cdi-dev January 2014