Re: [cdi-dev] Tests on observer resolution
Funny that this comes up now. I actually hacked into my coworker's
code using an observer on any object.
I always assumed the use of @Any in the examples came from a different
version of the event observer pattern where it was a best match, not
an any match.
On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Yeah, agreed, this is something I've puzzled over before.
On 6 Mar 2014, at 11:51, Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net> wrote:
> Hi all
>
>
> Yesterday when reviewing Martin Pull Request [1] regarding CDI 422 [2], we started a
discussion about Observer Resolution about a possible issue in the spec. I will not repeat
what was said on the IRC, if you're interested you can check the transcript [3] from
09:43.
>
> To check if this was an issue or not I did some test this morning with different
implementations. You can grab the tests on Github [4]
>
> Good news : OWB and Weld (1.x and 2.x) have the same behavior : the one describe in
the current spec, so there are no issue on this point.
> The only strange thing for me is that @Any seems totally useless regarding events
firing
>
> If you write :
> @Inject Event<Payload> payLoadEvent;
> or
> @Inject @Any Event<Payload> payLoadEvent;
>
> You'll always be allowed call payLoadEvent.select(new QualifierLiteral()) in both
case...
>
> Perhaps this point can be discussed to see if we remove @Any from the examples in the
spec or if we enforce its usage in the specification...
>
> Antoine
>
> [1] https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi/pull/207
> [2] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-422
> [3]
http://transcripts.jboss.org/channel/irc.freenode.org/%23jsr346/2014/%23j...
> [4] https://github.com/antoinesd/EventsTest
> _______________________________________________
> cdi-dev mailing list
> cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
_______________________________________________
cdi-dev mailing list
cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev