Re: [cdi-dev] Async events. We need ideas to improve CDI-499

We should enumerate all the arguments supporting async flag on an observer. So far I have only seen one: - an observer accessing @RequestScoped state would no longer be able to do so since it would be run in a worker thread I am eager to hear more arguments as this single one may not be enough to justify the observer-async-flag design decision. Remember that introducing fireAsync() itself does not break any existing application because existing applications are using fire(). It's when an existing application / library is modified to use fireAsync() when the problem may occur. Such change should not be done blindly. As with any other change, an author should consider possible consequences of the change. Clearly documenting the fact that fireAsync() processing is done in a different thread with a different @RequestScoped state may be sufficient. Jozef On 02/02/2015 03:43 PM, Antoine Sabot-Durand wrote: