[
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-407?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy...
]
Mark Struberg commented on CDI-407:
-----------------------------------
I agree with Martin that the Name must be explicitly given.
I think the example which makes most sense is not inheritance but ipmlements
{code}
@Named public class A implements X
@Named("a") @Alternative public class B implements X
{code}
Not sure which restrictions we have to define to get this properly working though. E.g.
having different interfaces (or no extends) would render this illegal imo. But only at
runtime as we cannot check those conditions for EL like we do for InjectionPoints.
We need to think about it a bit.
Specifiy @Named @Alternatives
-----------------------------
Key: CDI-407
URL:
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-407
Project: CDI Specification Issues
Issue Type: Clarification
Components: Beans, Inheritance and Specialization
Reporter: Thomas Andraschko
It's actually a must-have for product development and a common case.
We would like to have multiple implementations in our core and just activate them via
alternative.
I talked with struberg and its currently not defined in the specs.
e.g.
@Named public class A
@Named @Alternative public class B extends A
What should acutally happen if B is activated via beans.xml?
IMO B should be available in EL via "a" and "b".
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.1#6329)