[JBoss JIRA] Updated: (CDI-6) Clarify InjectionTarget method parameters
by Pete Muir (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-6?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.syst... ]
Pete Muir updated CDI-6:
------------------------
Assignee: Marius Bogoevici
Priority: Minor (was: Major)
It needs to be option 1, and the offending text needs changing to allow this to happen.
> Clarify InjectionTarget method parameters
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: CDI-6
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-6
> Project: CDI Specification Issues
> Issue Type: Clarification
> Components: Portable Extensions
> Affects Versions: 1.0
> Reporter: Jozef Hartinger
> Assignee: Marius Bogoevici
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 1.1 (Proposed)
>
>
> For the inject() method, the spec says: "inject() performs dependency injection upon the given object". It is not clear to me what does the "given object" refer two. if the CDI implementation uses proxies to implement interceptors and decorators, I can see two candidates for "the given object":
> - the product of the produce() method including interceptors and decorators -> a proxy
> - the target instance -> the object created by calling a constructor (no interception/decoration)
> Arguments for the first option
> - Let's have and extension that adds additional dependency injection capabilities by providing a custom InjectionTarget implementation and wrapping default InjectionTarget instances with custom ones. The custom InjectionTarget implementation does the additional DI in the inject() method and delegates to the default InjectionTarget instance to finish the injection. This implementation needs a direct access to the target instance (it cannot access field values through a proxy)
> - Interceptor-like behavior - similarity to interceptors, where the InvocationContext.getTarget() returns the (non-intercepted) target instance
> Arguments for the second option
> - the contract of the produce() method says: "produce() calls the constructor annotated @Inject if it exists, or the constructor with no parameters otherwise, as defined in Section 5.5.1, "Injection using the bean constructor", and returns the resulting instance. If the class has inter- ceptors, produce() is responsible for building the interceptors and decorators of the instance." which means it returns an intercepted/decorated instance.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
14 years, 8 months
[JBoss JIRA] Assigned: (CDI-2) Interceptor bindings defined at method level should override those at the class level
by Pete Muir (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-2?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.syst... ]
Pete Muir reassigned CDI-2:
---------------------------
Assignee: Marius Bogoevici
> Interceptor bindings defined at method level should override those at the class level
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CDI-2
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-2
> Project: CDI Specification Issues
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Interceptors
> Affects Versions: 1.0
> Reporter: Pete Muir
> Assignee: Marius Bogoevici
> Fix For: 1.1 (Proposed)
>
>
> We certainly *intended* for method-level interceptor bindings to override bindings declared at the class level, but whether we actually wrote that down is another story. It certainly doesn't look like that behavior is properly defined in the latest version of the spec.
> In section 9.5.2 of the spec:
> If the set of interceptor bindings of a bean or interceptor, including bindings inherited from stereotypes and other interceptor bindings, has two instances of a certain interceptor binding type and the instances have different values of some annotation member, the container automatically detects the problem and treats it as a definition error.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
14 years, 8 months
[JBoss JIRA] Updated: (CDI-2) Interceptor bindings defined at method level should override those at the class level
by Pete Muir (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-2?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.syst... ]
Pete Muir updated CDI-2:
------------------------
Description:
Gavin said:
"We certainly *intended* for method-level interceptor bindings to override bindings declared at the class level, but whether we actually wrote that down is another story. It certainly doesn't look like that behavior is properly defined in the latest version of the spec."
In section 9.5.2 of the spec:
If the set of interceptor bindings of a bean or interceptor, including bindings inherited from stereotypes and other interceptor bindings, has two instances of a certain interceptor binding type and the instances have different values of some annotation member, the container automatically detects the problem and treats it as a definition error.
was:
We certainly *intended* for method-level interceptor bindings to override bindings declared at the class level, but whether we actually wrote that down is another story. It certainly doesn't look like that behavior is properly defined in the latest version of the spec.
In section 9.5.2 of the spec:
If the set of interceptor bindings of a bean or interceptor, including bindings inherited from stereotypes and other interceptor bindings, has two instances of a certain interceptor binding type and the instances have different values of some annotation member, the container automatically detects the problem and treats it as a definition error.
> Interceptor bindings defined at method level should override those at the class level
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CDI-2
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-2
> Project: CDI Specification Issues
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Interceptors
> Affects Versions: 1.0
> Reporter: Pete Muir
> Assignee: Marius Bogoevici
> Fix For: 1.1 (Proposed)
>
>
> Gavin said:
> "We certainly *intended* for method-level interceptor bindings to override bindings declared at the class level, but whether we actually wrote that down is another story. It certainly doesn't look like that behavior is properly defined in the latest version of the spec."
> In section 9.5.2 of the spec:
> If the set of interceptor bindings of a bean or interceptor, including bindings inherited from stereotypes and other interceptor bindings, has two instances of a certain interceptor binding type and the instances have different values of some annotation member, the container automatically detects the problem and treats it as a definition error.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
14 years, 8 months
Code Formatting Rules
by George Gastaldi
Hello,
Which code formatting rules are we following on the spec ? Is there a
Eclipse formatter XML avaiable for this project ?
Regards,
Goerge
14 years, 8 months