If an interceptor is enabled by both @Priority and in beans.xml then:

1) The priority defines the position of the interceptor in the interceptor chain
2) The position of the interceptor declaration in beans.xml defines the position of the interceptor in the interceptor chain (which is possibly different from (1))

Unless I am wrong the spec does not define which of these should take precedence nor forbids this case. As this case is unspecified I would consider "calling the interceptor twice" a possible implementation.

Jozef

On 10/18/2013 06:13 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
I'd say that's an impl bug.

beans.xml and @Priority only say IF and in which order the interceptor is enabled. But it still is there only once.

LieGrue,
strub


From: John D. Ament <john.d.ament@gmail.com>
To: users@javaee-spec.java.net
Cc: Tang Yong <tangyong@cn.fujitsu.com>; Pete Muir <pete.muir@gmail.com>; Bill Shannon <bill.shannon@oracle.com>
Sent: Thursday, 17 October 2013, 15:24
Subject: [javaee-spec users] Re: About Interceptors's enabling

I wonder if this is somehow related to an issue I saw pop up on SO recently.

Basically, there's an issue where if an interceptor is annotated
@Priority and listed in beans.xml, it gets invoked twice.

Is this the expected behavior?

John

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 9:12 AM, Pete Muir <pmuir@bleepbleep.org.uk> wrote:
> Hi Tang,
>
> I'm afraid I don't quite understand your question :-(
>
> Perhaps you could provide a concrete example of what you would prefer?
>
> Pete
>
> On 17 Oct 2013, at 09:03, Tang Yong <tangyong@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
>> Pete
>> CC: Bill
>>
>> I have a question about Interceptors's enabling.
>>
>> The story should come from [1] and [2], and from "5.3 Ordering
>> Interceptors using the Priority Annotation" of JSR 318.
>>
>> "An interceptor bound to a component, a component method, or constructor
>> using interceptor binding may be enabled for the entire application by
>> applying the Priority annotation, along with a priority value, on the
>> interceptor class."
>>
>> From another fact, Interceptors are deployment-specific and are disabled
>> by default. Like alternatives, interceptors have to be
>> enabled by using the CDI deployment descriptor beans.xml of the jar.
>>
>> Well, if I uses interceptors binding, I will meet two cases,
>>
>> 1) I must enable interceptors in beans.xml explicitly if I am not ready
>> to use @Priority.
>>
>> 2) Once I uses @Priority, I need to take care of whether to need to
>> declare interceptors in beans.xml becase this may break/override
>> invocation order of interceptors.
>>
>> Based on such facts, enable interceptors in beans.xml explicitly has
>> brought two different resposibilities for interceptors binding, so, for
>> an user, this has caused some puzzles just as I made a mistake in [2].
>>
>> My question is that why we can not make "enable interceptors in
>> beans.xml explicitly" bring *only one* resposibility?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Tang
>>
>> [1]:
>> https://java.net/projects/javaee-spec/lists/jsr342-experts/archive/2012-12/message/15
>> [2]: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WELD-1528
>>
>>
>> --
>> －－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
>> Tang Yong
>> Senior Engineer
>> GlassFish Committer (OSGi & OSGi-JavaEE)
>> OSGi Alliance Supporter
>> Blog: http://osgizone.typepad.com/tangyong/
>>
>> Nanjing Fujitsu NanDa Software Tec CO.,LTD
>> http://www.fujitsu.com/cn/fnst
>> Tel: +86-25-86630566-8310
>> Fax: +86-25-83317685
>> －－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
>>
>