Re: [cdi-dev] Constructor dependency

Hi Sebastian, the "superfluous" constructor is required for client proxies (i.e. for normal-scoped beans). Weld may use non-portable JVM APIs that allow to allocate proxy instances without this constructor (Unsafe). The feature is called "Relaxed construction" [1]. Again, this feature is not portable. Martin [1] http://docs.jboss.org/weld/reference/latest/en-US/html/configure.html#rel... Dne 7.7.2015 v 14:18 Sebastian Łaskawiec napsal(a): > Hey! > > I've seen CDI 2.0 Early Draft - congratulations! Looks very promising! > > I would like to ask about something slightly different than CDI 2.0 - > constructor injection. I'm a big fan of using it because I can easily > inject mocks into tested objects. This way I can limit the number of > Arquillian tests and speed up testing phase in my project. > > However the drawback is that need 2 constructors in my beans: > > @ApplicationScoped > public class MyBean { > public MyBean() { > } > > @Inject > public MyBean(OtherBean bean) { > } > } > > Is it possible to get rid of the zero-parameter constructor? I can > imagine that it may be required by dependency resolution mechanism (for > example instantiating beans with cyclic dependencies A -> B -> C -> A), > but on the other hand we actually can create an instance without calling > a constructor - using Unsafe (but using Unsafe is always questionable). > > Could you please tell me if there are any plans around this topic? > > Thanks > Sebastian > _______________________________________________ > 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. >