I looked at the methods under *InterceptionFactory*. To me, it sounds
better to rename it to InterceptorConfigurator as it has .configure() plus
it configures or wraps the classes.
Thoughts?
Many thanks,
Emily
===========================
Emily Jiang
WebSphere Application Server, CDI Development Lead
MP 211, DE3A20, Winchester, Hampshire, England, SO21 2JN
Phone: +44 (0)1962 816278 Internal: 246278
Email: emijiang(a)uk.ibm.com
Lotus Notes: Emily Jiang/UK/IBM@IBMGB
From: John Ament <john.ament(a)spartasystems.com>
To: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>, cdi-dev
<cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Date: 08/11/2016 17:17
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for
InterceptorProxyFactory
Sent by: cdi-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
I can't think of any, just want to make sure no one else was.
From: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>
Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2016 12:04 PM
To: John Ament; cdi-dev
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 2:38 PM John Ament <john.ament(a)spartasystems.com>
wrote:
If the only use case is for inceptors, I agree to InterceptionFactory.
What other use case you are thinking of John?
From: cdi-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org <cdi-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org> on
behalf of Werner Keil <werner.keil(a)gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2016 8:30 AM
To: cdi-dev
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
+1 for InterceptionFactory, too.
It sounds simpler.
Werner
On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 2:29 PM, <cdi-dev-request(a)lists.jboss.org> wrote:
Send cdi-dev mailing list submissions to
cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
cdi-dev-request(a)lists.jboss.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
cdi-dev-owner(a)lists.jboss.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of cdi-dev digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory (Mark Struberg)
2. Re: Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
(Antoine Sabot-Durand)
3. Re: Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
(Romain Manni-Bucau)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 16:58:04 +0000 (UTC)
From: Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de>
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com>, Antoine Sabot-Durand
<antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>
Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Message-ID: <421014798.1728352.1478537884045(a)mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
InterceptionFactory sounds fine for me.
LieGrue,
strub
On Monday, 7 November 2016, 15:55, Romain Manni-Bucau <
rmannibucau(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hello Antoine,
concurrency-utilities use ContextFactory for something pretty close (a
proxying
adding spec features over invocations) which is less "cglib-like"
than "Enhancer" so I'd like to keep Factory. In the list
InterceptionFactory looks clear enough. We neevr speak of business method
anymore I think so it would add a difficulty for something very useful to
go that deep in the naming I think.
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | JavaEE Factory
2016-11-07 15:44 GMT+01:00 Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net
:
Hi all,
>In my last review for CDI-580 (
https://github.com/cdi-spec/
cdi/pull/315), I removed all reference to proxies in Javadoc and spec doc
following various feedback.
>So now the name of the interface is the only one dealing with
Proxy, so
we really need to find it a new name.
>I listed some proposal in PR 315:
>- InstanceEnhancer (short but not very clear)
>- BusinessMethodInvocationFactor y (more exact from spec pov, but is it
clear
from user pov?)
>- InterceptionFactory (cleared from user pov and near our initial
name)
>- InterceptionEnhancer
>Feedback and other names are welcome.
>Antoine
>______________________________ _________________
>cdi-dev mailing list
>cdi-dev(a)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.
>
_______________________________________________
cdi-dev mailing list
cdi-dev(a)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.
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2016 13:24:28 +0000
From: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de>, Romain Manni-Bucau
<rmannibucau(a)gmail.com>
Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Message-ID:
<CABu-YBRhd8UYWck4-fibda_Ykoh-n=
u_Xfhs48tUcBCOw_TiAw(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
+1 for InterceptionFactory as well. I change my PR with this name.
Romain, for the record, mentioning "business method invocation" and
paragraph 7.2 is the only mean to bind this feature to the spec without
mentioning implementation specific stuff like proxies. That's why the
javadoc and text for this new section lack clarity. In other word we lack
a
simple name for instances on which "methods invocation" are "business
methods invocation".
Antoine
On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 5:58 PM Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de> wrote:
> InterceptionFactory sounds fine for me.
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
> On Monday, 7 November 2016, 15:55, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >Hello Antoine,
> >
> >
> >concurrency-utilities use ContextFactory for something pretty close (a
> proxying adding spec features over invocations) which is less
"cglib-like"
than "Enhancer" so I'd like to keep Factory. In the
list
InterceptionFactory looks clear enough. We neevr speak of business
method
anymore I think so it would add a difficulty for something very
useful
to
go that deep in the naming I think.
>
>
>
>Romain Manni-Bucau
>@rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | JavaEE Factory
>
>2016-11-07 15:44 GMT+01:00 Antoine Sabot-Durand <
antoine(a)sabot-durand.net
:
>
>Hi all,
>>
>>
>>In my last review for CDI-580 (
https://github.com/cdi-spec/
cdi/pull/315), I removed all reference to proxies in Javadoc and spec
doc
following various feedback.
>>So now the name of the interface is the only one dealing with Proxy,
so
we really need to find it a new name.
>>I listed some proposal in PR 315:
>>- InstanceEnhancer (short but not very clear)
>>- BusinessMethodInvocationFactor y (more exact from spec pov, but is
it
clear from user pov?)
>>- InterceptionFactory (cleared from user pov and near our initial
name)
>>- InterceptionEnhancer
>>
>>
>>Feedback and other names are welcome.
>>
>>
>>Antoine
>>______________________________ _________________
>>cdi-dev mailing list
>>cdi-dev(a)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.
> >>
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >cdi-dev mailing list
> >cdi-dev(a)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.
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20161108/efa4663c/at...
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2016 14:28:27 +0100
From: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Finding a new name for InterceptorProxyFactory
To: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>
Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Message-ID:
<CACLE=
7N-q9Uk9F2JuAU9f4T5wb8u26MMJ_LbNNhd1LkeQxvcWg(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
2016-11-08 14:24 GMT+01:00 Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net
:
+1 for InterceptionFactory as well. I change my PR with this name.
Romain, for the record, mentioning "business method invocation" and
paragraph 7.2 is the only mean to bind this feature to the spec without
mentioning implementation specific stuff like proxies. That's why the
javadoc and text for this new section lack clarity. In other word we
lack a
> simple name for instances on which "methods invocation" are "business
> methods invocation".
Agree and it fits the spec but since EJB I never heard any developer (not
developping weld or openwebbeans) using this term so for the API it would
be rude IMHO - was the point, nothing more.
Antoine
On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 5:58 PM Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de> wrote:
> InterceptionFactory sounds fine for me.
>
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> On Monday, 7 November 2016, 15:55, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >Hello Antoine,
> >
> >
> >concurrency-utilities use ContextFactory for something pretty close (a
> proxying adding spec features over invocations) which is less
"cglib-like"
> than "Enhancer" so I'd like to keep Factory. In the
list
> InterceptionFactory looks clear enough. We neevr speak of business
method
>
anymore I think so it would add a difficulty for something very
useful
to
>> go that deep in the naming I think.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >@rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | JavaEE Factory
>> >
>> >2016-11-07 15:44 GMT+01:00 Antoine Sabot-Durand <
>> antoine(a)sabot-durand.net
:
>> >
>> >Hi all,
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>In my last review for CDI-580 (
https://github.com/cdi-spec/
>> cdi/pull/315), I removed all reference to proxies in Javadoc and spec
doc
> following various feedback.
> >>So now the name of the interface is the only one dealing with Proxy,
so
> we really need to find it a new name.
> >>I listed some proposal in PR 315:
> >>- InstanceEnhancer (short but not very clear)
> >>- BusinessMethodInvocationFactor y (more exact from spec pov, but is
it
> clear from user pov?)
> >>- InterceptionFactory (cleared from user pov and near our initial
name)
> >>- InterceptionEnhancer
> >>
> >>
> >>Feedback and other names are welcome.
> >>
> >>
> >>Antoine
> >>______________________________ _________________
> >>cdi-dev mailing list
> >>cdi-dev(a)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.
> >>
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >cdi-dev mailing list
> >cdi-dev(a)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.
>> >
>> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20161108/c6e8a845/at...
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
cdi-dev mailing list
cdi-dev(a)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.
End of cdi-dev Digest, Vol 72, Issue 5
**************************************
NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments may contain confidential,
proprietary, and/or privileged information which should be treated
accordingly. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the
sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this message, and destroy all
physical and electronic copies. Thank you.
_______________________________________________
cdi-dev mailing list
cdi-dev(a)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.
NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments may contain confidential,
proprietary, and/or privileged information which should be treated
accordingly. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the
sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this message, and destroy all
physical and electronic copies. Thank you.
_______________________________________________
cdi-dev mailing list
cdi-dev(a)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.
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU