March 2014 - cdi-dev - Jboss List Archives

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-401) Clarify the meaning of "bean class local view"

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-401?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Work on CDI-401 started by Antoine Sabot-Durand. > Clarify the meaning of "bean class local view" > ---------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-401 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-401 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Clarification > Reporter: Martin Kouba > Assignee: Antoine Sabot-Durand > Labels: CDI_spec_chge, Ready_to_fix > Fix For: 1.2 Proposed > > > 3.2.2 Bean types of a session bean: > {quote} > The unrestricted set of bean types for a session bean contains all local interfaces of the bean and their superinterfaces. If the session bean has a *bean class local view*, the unrestricted set of bean types contains the bean class and all superclasses. > ... > {quote} > AFAIK the EJB spec does not define anything like "bean class local view". I believe the CDI spec is referencing *No-Interface View* here (a variation of the local view that exposes the non-static public methods of the bean class without the use of a separate business interface). -- 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, 9 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 reassigned CDI-397: ---------------------------------------- Assignee: Antoine Sabot-Durand > 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 > Assignee: Antoine Sabot-Durand > 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, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-401) Clarify the meaning of "bean class local view"

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-401?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand reassigned CDI-401: ---------------------------------------- Assignee: Antoine Sabot-Durand > Clarify the meaning of "bean class local view" > ---------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-401 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-401 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Clarification > Reporter: Martin Kouba > Assignee: Antoine Sabot-Durand > Labels: CDI_spec_chge, Ready_to_fix > Fix For: 1.2 Proposed > > > 3.2.2 Bean types of a session bean: > {quote} > The unrestricted set of bean types for a session bean contains all local interfaces of the bean and their superinterfaces. If the session bean has a *bean class local view*, the unrestricted set of bean types contains the bean class and all superclasses. > ... > {quote} > AFAIK the EJB spec does not define anything like "bean class local view". I believe the CDI spec is referencing *No-Interface View* here (a variation of the local view that exposes the non-static public methods of the bean class without the use of a separate business interface). -- 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, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-422) Wrong example for event qualifier types with members

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-422?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand reassigned CDI-422: ---------------------------------------- Assignee: Martin Kouba > Wrong example for event qualifier types with members > ---------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-422 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-422 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Events > Reporter: Martin Kouba > Assignee: Martin Kouba > Priority: Minor > Labels: CDI_spec_chge > Fix For: 1.2 Proposed > > > The following snippet in "10.2.2 Event qualifier types with members" is wrong: > {code} > public void login() { > final User user = ...; > loggedInEvent.fire( new LoggedInEvent(user), > new RoleQualifier() { public String value() { return user.getRole(); } ); > } > {code} > {{javax.enterprise.event.Event.fire()}} method does not have qualifiers param. The example should either use {{Event.select(Annotation...)}} along with {{Event.fire()}} or {{BeanManager.fireEvent(Object, Annotation...)}}. -- 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, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-422) Wrong example for event qualifier types with members

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-422?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand commented on CDI-422: ------------------------------------------ Right [~mkouba]. Nice catch ;). I added this to 1.2. I have two remarks on this : # There are other wrong example after this one assuming the existence of this qualifier param in {{javax.enterprise.event.Event.fire()}} method. In 10.2.3 for instance {code} documentEvent.fire( document, new UpdatedQualifier() {}, new ByAdminQualifier() {} ); {code} # After the correction, theses examples, in order to be valid, should add {{@Inject @Any Event<LoggedInEvent> loggedInEvent;}} . But the notion of Injecting {{@Any Event<T>}} is introduced in part _10.3 Firing events_. To make the chapter easier to understand I propose to switch 10.2 and 10.3 (it doesn't sound stupid to deal with firing event before dealing with observer by the way). > Wrong example for event qualifier types with members > ---------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-422 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-422 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Events > Reporter: Martin Kouba > Priority: Minor > Labels: CDI_spec_chge > Fix For: 1.2 Proposed > > > The following snippet in "10.2.2 Event qualifier types with members" is wrong: > {code} > public void login() { > final User user = ...; > loggedInEvent.fire( new LoggedInEvent(user), > new RoleQualifier() { public String value() { return user.getRole(); } ); > } > {code} > {{javax.enterprise.event.Event.fire()}} method does not have qualifiers param. The example should either use {{Event.select(Annotation...)}} along with {{Event.fire()}} or {{BeanManager.fireEvent(Object, Annotation...)}}. -- 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, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-422) Wrong example for event qualifier types with members

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-422?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand updated CDI-422: ------------------------------------- Labels: CDI_spec_chge (was: ) > Wrong example for event qualifier types with members > ---------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-422 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-422 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Events > Reporter: Martin Kouba > Priority: Minor > Labels: CDI_spec_chge > Fix For: 1.2 Proposed > > > The following snippet in "10.2.2 Event qualifier types with members" is wrong: > {code} > public void login() { > final User user = ...; > loggedInEvent.fire( new LoggedInEvent(user), > new RoleQualifier() { public String value() { return user.getRole(); } ); > } > {code} > {{javax.enterprise.event.Event.fire()}} method does not have qualifiers param. The example should either use {{Event.select(Annotation...)}} along with {{Event.fire()}} or {{BeanManager.fireEvent(Object, Annotation...)}}. -- 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, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-422) Wrong example for event qualifier types with members

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-422?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand updated CDI-422: ------------------------------------- Fix Version/s: 1.2 Proposed > Wrong example for event qualifier types with members > ---------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-422 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-422 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Events > Reporter: Martin Kouba > Priority: Minor > Fix For: 1.2 Proposed > > > The following snippet in "10.2.2 Event qualifier types with members" is wrong: > {code} > public void login() { > final User user = ...; > loggedInEvent.fire( new LoggedInEvent(user), > new RoleQualifier() { public String value() { return user.getRole(); } ); > } > {code} > {{javax.enterprise.event.Event.fire()}} method does not have qualifiers param. The example should either use {{Event.select(Annotation...)}} along with {{Event.fire()}} or {{BeanManager.fireEvent(Object, Annotation...)}}. -- 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, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss JIRA] (CDI-377) automatic JSR-330 annotation processing problematic

by Antoine Sabot-Durand (JIRA)

[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-377?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand reopened CDI-377: -------------------------------------- > automatic JSR-330 annotation processing problematic > --------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CDI-377 > URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-377 > Project: CDI Specification Issues > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Java EE integration > Affects Versions: 1.1.PFD > Environment: glassfish-4 > Reporter: Reuben Pasquini > Assignee: Antoine Sabot-Durand > Labels: CDI_spec_chge, CDI_tck_chge, Ready_to_fix > Fix For: 1.2 Proposed > > > The jsr-330 dependency injection annotations (javax.inject.*) find use in javase environments using IOC packages like guice. > Adding a dependency on a jar that uses guice or whatever in a javase environment > to a war deployed to a jee7 container > results in CDI processing annotated classes intended for > app-managed injection. See this ticket filed with guava for a concrete example: > https://code.google.com/p/guava-libraries/issues/detail?id=1433 -- 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, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

Regarding CDI-280 and beans terminology

by Antoine Sabot-Durand

Hi all, I really think we should work for terminology simplification but I wonder if it’s realistic in our timeframe. According to me the easy part is : - « Bean Class » for the class that gets Scanned : *Bean Class* (_quite obvious_) - « Bean Metadata for Bean<T> : *Bean Metadata* using « Bean » here is confusing) - « Required Type » for the type of injection type - « Session Bean » for EJB bean Now the more complex part is for the biggest one. From my understanding we have 2 concept with at least 3 different names : - Contextual Instance = Bean Instance = Bean - Contextual Reference = Client Proxy = Bean Reference I I’m not wrong on this classification, we should really choose an official name for these 2 concepts My personal choice would be « Bean Instance » and « Bean Reference » with perhaps a link to contextual names in chapter 6. The term « Bean » could be reserved to mean one to the other when difference is not relevant… What do you think ? Antoine Sabot-Durand ——————————————— Twitter : @antoine_sd CDI co-spec lead & eco-system development Agorava tech lead

10 years, 9 months

2
2
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

cdi-dev March 2014