Re: [cdi-dev] Clarification for manually resolving 'Instance'
Hi,
wouldn't be so hard to specify that beanManager.getBeans(Instance.class); is the same
as
beanManager.getBeans(new TypeLiteral<Instance<Object>>() {}.getType());
Cheers,
Arne
--
Arne Limburg - Enterprise Architekt
open knowledge GmbH, Oldenburg
Bismarckstraße 13, 26122 Oldenburg
Mobil: +49 (0) 151 108 22 942
Tel: +49 (0) 441 - 4082-0
Fax: +49 (0) 441 - 4082-111
arne.limburg(a)openknowledge.de
http://www.openknowledge.de
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Oldenburg, HRB 4670
Geschäftsführer: Lars Röwekamp, Jens Schumann
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: cdi-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:cdi-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org] Im Auftrag
von Pete Muir
Gesendet: Sonntag, 25. September 2011 22:08
An: Mark Struberg
Cc: cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
Betreff: Re: [cdi-dev] Clarification for manually resolving 'Instance'
On 25 Sep 2011, at 21:06, Mark Struberg wrote:
> The parameterized type resolution rules are correct, it's
just there
> is no raw type of Instance to resolve.
Yes, I think too, but was not sure if everyone do see it that way.
Ok, so until I actually see someone make a specific comment, I think we can leave this
alone :-)
> Should there be? Not sure if it would just be more confusing?
I already saw the usage of Instance.class without the TypeLiteral (which is pretty well
hidden in the specs).
And people wondered why that doesn't work ...
Ok, file an issue, we can think about how to improve this.
_______________________________________________
cdi-dev mailing list
cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev