[cdi-dev] Fwd: [jsr345-experts] Final methods in a bean class?

From: Marina Vatkina <marina.vatkina(a)oracle.com&gt; Subject: Re: [jsr345-experts] Re: Final methods in a bean class? Date: 29 March 2013 20:53:01 GMT To: Pete Muir <pmuir(a)bleepbleep.org.uk&gt; Cc: jsr345-experts(a)ejb-spec.java.net, Jeremy Bauer <jrbauer(a)us.ibm.com&gt; Reply-To: marina.vatkina(a)oracle.com On 3/29/13 1:39 PM, Pete Muir wrote: > Note this is only a problem for session beans with a no-interface view. Correct. This is what we are looking at. > > We could clean this up in the CDI spec probably, by adjusting the proxyability requirements to be identical to EJB for no-interface session views. > > Worth doing? Yes. Please. -marina > > On 29 Mar 2013, at 19:57, Marina Vatkina <marina.vatkina(a)oracle.com&gt; wrote: > >> On 3/29/13 12:45 PM, Pete Muir wrote: >>> On 29 Mar 2013, at 18:42, Jeremy Bauer <jrbauer(a)us.ibm.com&gt; wrote: >>> >>>> I may have overlooked something, but does CDI allow non-private non-public methods to be final? >>> No. Not *if* a proxy is required. >> If the EJB container created the proxy, it won't include the non-public methods. Even if the CDI spec allows more, a compliant EJB container won't intercept on those... >> >> -marina >>>> With the new rules, couldn't we have this situation? >>>> >>>> @Stateless public class MyBean { >>>> final void m() { }; >>>> } >>>> >>>> public class Other { >>>> @EJB MyBean field; // PASS >>>> @Inject MyBean field; // FAIL - unproxyable >>>> } >>>> >>>> >>>> -Jeremy >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> From: Marina Vatkina <marina.vatkina(a)oracle.com&gt; >>>> To: jsr345-experts(a)ejb-spec.java.net, >>>> Cc: Pete Muir <pmuir(a)bleepbleep.org.uk&gt;, Jeremy Bauer/Rochester/IBM@IBMUS >>>> Date: 03/28/2013 02:06 PM >>>> Subject: [jsr345-experts] Re: Final methods in a bean class? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> So we are just catching up with the CDI spec ;) >>>> >>>> Thanks Pete. >>>> >>>> -marina >>>> >>>> On 3/28/13 11:21 AM, Pete Muir wrote: >>>>> Static methods were never considered as a block to proxability. >>>>> >>>>> On 28 Mar 2013, at 18:20, Marina Vatkina <marina.vatkina(a)oracle.com&gt; wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> How about static methods? >>>>>> >>>>>> thanks, >>>>>> -marina >>>>>> >>>>>> On 3/28/13 11:12 AM, Pete Muir wrote: >>>>>>> We updated the requirements in CDI to specifically exclude private methods from proxability requirements. Note we moved this to it's own section - 3.15 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Pete >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 28 Mar 2013, at 17:16, Marina Vatkina <marina.vatkina(a)oracle.com&gt; wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Well, Pete is on this list (and I'm cc-ing him here explicitly), but I don't think private final (or static final) methods should be restricted... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -marina >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 3/28/13 9:30 AM, Jeremy Bauer wrote: >>>>>>>>> Hi Marina, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Won't allowing final methods will cause an inconsistency with the CDI spec? CDI 1.0 section 5.4.1 says: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Certain legal bean types cannot be proxied by the container: >>>>>>>>> [...] >>>>>>>>> • classes which are declared final or have final methods, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> And I believe this is true in CDI 1.1, but I don't have that spec handy. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -Jeremy >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> From: Marina Vatkina <marina.vatkina(a)oracle.com&gt; >>>>>>>>> To: jsr345-experts(a)ejb-spec.java.net, >>>>>>>>> Date: 03/27/2013 06:21 PM >>>>>>>>> Subject: [jsr345-experts] Re: Final methods in a bean class? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> After a longer discussion with Mark offline and not to allow users to >>>>>>>>> shoot themselves into a foot, the new proposal is to change both >>>>>>>>> statements as follow: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> (a) "All non-static public methods of the bean class and of any >>>>>>>>> superclasses except the java.lang.Object, are exposed as business methods." >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> (b) "Business methods exposed through the no-interface view must not be >>>>>>>>> declared final." >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Let me know if anybody disagrees. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>>>> -marina >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 3/27/13 11:36 AM, Marina Vatkina wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Experts, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The EJB spec currently requires that if a bean exposes a no-interface >>>>>>>>>> view (see 4.9.8 Session Bean’s No-Interface View): >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> (a) "All public methods of the bean class and of any superclasses >>>>>>>>>> except the java.lang.Object, are exposed as business methods through >>>>>>>>>> the no-interface view." >>>>>>>>>> (b) "All methods of the bean class and any superclasses must not be >>>>>>>>>> declared final." >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> For all other views the rules for a *business method* is >>>>>>>>>> "The method must not be declared as final or static." >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Does any of you see a problem with removing the rule (b) and changing >>>>>>>>>> the rule (a) to: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> "All non-final non-static public methods of the bean class and of any >>>>>>>>>> superclasses except the java.lang.Object, are exposed as business >>>>>>>>>> methods through the no-interface view." >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> thanks, >>>>>>>>>> -marina >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>