Hey guys,

thinking more to it here few more remarks/requests:

- as an extension writer think having an explicit build is better than an implicit one in particular when you manage several built instances. The fact it is sometimes implicit sometimes explicit has these drawbacks:

-- API starts to be huge for a poor gain

-- you actually don't know what is done more easily if not inline (which is likely the case for medium/advanced extensions)

- why having Builders class with static methods where we could use the bean manager as entry point for them. Would be more natural since the BM already build some instance like AT and easier to find in the IDE and look less magic.

-- bonus on this one: would also bind the calls to a CDI context which makes things easier to track and if we speak later of multiple contexts in the same classloader we wouldn't be broken

wdyt?

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau |  Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Tomitriber

2016-02-05 16:01 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com>:

Why not making all Annotated* mutable during boot lifecycle?

Would allow to get rid of the annotated root in the modification code, for instance we could convert:

    type.getMethods().stream().filter(m -> m.isAnnotationPresent(Foo.class)).forEach(m ->event.setAnnotatedType().addToMethod(m, MyInterceptor.BINDING));

to

    type.getMethods().stream().filter(m -> m.isAnnotationPresent(Foo.class)).forEach(m -> m.mutate().add(MyInterceptor.BINDING));

or if we don't want to add mutate in the existing types we could use configurator as root for type type and recreate a Configurator graph matching annotated graph.

Advatage is first code i a bit awkward in the sense you can call setAnnotatedType() multiple type (what would happen? only last modification will be saved? or you have to keep a reference to the configurator once called which breaks the fluent API provded by streams IMO.

wdyt?

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau |  Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Tomitriber

2016-02-05 15:24 GMT+01:00 Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine@sabot-durand.net>:

Hi all,

Following discussion during last meeting, I rewrote most of my PR for builders.

We now have 2 clean and distinct ways of using them

1) in DSL style (with a Configurator interface without build() method)

public void processAT(@Observes ProcessAnnotatedType<?> pat) {

  pat.setAnnotatedType().read(pat.getAnnotatedType()).addToType(new AnnotationLiteral<MyInterceptor>() {};);

}

2) In classical reusable builder mode (builders extends configurator and only add build() method)

public void processAT(@Observes ProcessAnnotatedType<?> pat) {

 AnnotatedTypeBuilder atb = Builders.annotatedTypeBuilder();

 atb.read(pat.getAnnotatedType()).addToType(new  AnnotationLiteral<MyInterceptor>() {};);

  pat.setAnnotatedType(atb.build());

}

As Configurators don't have build() method there's no risk that users mix them with standard builders.

For clarity sake, builders are no more available in lifecycle event but in Builders class for consistency.

I'm quite happy with the result, but I'm sure you'll have comment ;). So thanks for your feedback

https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi/pull/270

Antoine

_______________________________________________
cdi-dev mailing list
cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev

Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the code under the Apache License, Version 2 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other intellectual property rights inherent in such information.