[
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-584?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy...
]
Antoine Sabot-Durand commented on CDI-584:
------------------------------------------
[~mkouba] agree with you, but, that means we should check if some Lifecycle events (like
ProcessBean) could have new method to change the underlying meta-data (i.e
{{ProcessBean#addInjectionPoint()}}).
[~rmannibucau] also agree. The idea is not to force OWB to change its behavior but to
state that it's not portable. And we should provide standard way to perform these meta
data mutation at the lifecycle event level (see my remark above).
Clarification needed on Set mutability returned by SPI
------------------------------------------------------
Key: CDI-584
URL:
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-584
Project: CDI Specification Issues
Issue Type: Clarification
Components: Portable Extensions
Reporter: Antoine Sabot-Durand
{{ProcessBean}} lifecycle event could be the occasion to add new Injection point to an
existing bean, but when you call {{ProcessBean#getBean()#getInjectionPoints()}} the
returned set is mutable in OWB and immutable in Weld.
As the spec doesn't precise if the Set should be mutable or not, each impl made its
own choice.
The result is a lack of consistency between both impl and an interesting feature harder
to do with Weld (work with AnnotatedType or create a custom bean to add injection point)
More generally we should clarify mutability of each Set returned in the SPI. And check if
it wouldn't be better to add method to life cycle event to provide a
"temporary" mutable set (i.e. {{ProcessBean#getInjectionPoints()}}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.11#64026)