]
Antoine Sabot-Durand updated CDI-403:
-------------------------------------
Issue Type: Feature Request (was: Clarification)
why decorator requires interface
--------------------------------
Key: CDI-403
URL:
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-403
Project: CDI Specification Issues
Issue Type: Feature Request
Reporter: Mathieu Lachance
Labels: F2F2016
Fix For: 2.0 (discussion)
As discussed with Jozef Hartinger on the WELD forum thread (see forum reference and
CDI-224),
would it be possible to revisit why decorator requires an interface ?
I do not understand the semantic difference between:
1. a decorator to be an abstract class which implements an interface, which delegate to
the same interface.
2. a decorator to be a concrete class which extends a another class, which delegates to
the same class.
Why 1. should be allowed and why 2. should be disallowed ?
As stated in CDI-224, if there is no technical reason of disallowing 2., should it be
then considerate as a vendor specific feature to support it whether or not ?
It is kind of sad that only decorators requires an interface while all the others Java EE
6 features do not.
Thanks,