Re: [cdi-dev] Answer from EL spec lead: no, "." is not valid in an EL name.

> @Named("team1.superBean") and @Named("team1.superBean.enriched") will > lead to conflicts and that's things I saw several times in spring apps > which are clearly not possible using CDI + EL properly. Yes and these conflicts are handled by the spec. See 5.3.1

> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau > http://www.tomitribe.com > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com > https://github.com/rmannibucau > > > 2015-01-15 11:22 GMT+01:00 Jozef Hartinger <jharting(a)redhat.com&gt;: >> >> On 01/15/2015 11:11 AM, Mark Struberg wrote: >>> >>> Jozef, your argumentation is flawed already at the very beginning. >>> Currently there is no bean with the name "javax", thus "x.y ... and x is >>> the >>> bean name of the other bean" will not be a problem. >>> >>> All that javax is simply not a bean name but a dirty hack in the >>> ELResolver. That is something totally different. >> >> Mark, please read the e-mail again. I am not saying there are two beans >> named "javax". I am saying there are two beans with the following names: >> >> - javax.enterprise.context.conversation (the built-in one) >> - javax (Marks's bean) >> >> where the former one is in form x.y where y is a valid bean name: >> (javax) . (enterprise.context.conversation) >> >> and thus since javax is both x above and a bean name of Mark's bean, this >> results in an exception. >> >> >>> Thus the rest of your argumentation chain is also invalid. >>> >>> LieGrue, >>> strub >>> >>> >>>> On Thursday, 15 January 2015, 10:47, Jozef Hartinger >>>> <jharting(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>>>> >>>>> T he @Named("javax") argument is not valid. The spec says: >>>> >>>> Suppose two beans are both available for injection in a certain war, >>>> and >>>> either: >>>> - the two beans have the same bean name and the name is not resolvable, >>>> or >>>> - the bean name of one bean is of the form x.y, where y is a valid bean >>>> name, and x is the bean >>>> name of the other bean, >>>> the container automatically detects the problem and treats it as a >>>> deployment problem. >>>> >>>> So we have two beans: >>>> - javax.enterprise.context.conversation (the built-in one) >>>> - javax (Marks's bean) >>>> >>>> now: >>>> >>>> 1) the bean name of one bean is of the form x.y, where y is a valid >>>> bean >>>> name - that is javax.enterprise.context.conversation >>>> x = javax >>>> y = enterprise.context.conversation >>>> 2) and x is the bean name of the other bean - same as the name of >>>> Mark's >>>> @Named("javax") bean >>>> 3) the container automatically detects the problem and treats it as a >>>> deployment problem >>>> >>>> Therefore, a bean named @Named("javax") will cause a deployment >>>> problem >>>> no matter whether it is actually available via EL or not. >>>> >>>> To summarize, the spec already anticipates the problem and forbids this >>>> case explicitly. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 01/14/2015 04:45 PM, Mark Struberg wrote: >>>>> >>>>> And then break all applications which have a @Named("javax") >>>> >>>> public class MyBean? >>>>> >>>>> It's simply not an option imo. It breaks lots of other specs and >>>> >>>> features. This is an XOR situation. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> LieGrue, >>>>> strub >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>> >>>>>> From: Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>>> To: Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com&gt; >>>>>> Cc: Cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>; Edward Burns >>>> >>>> <edward.burns(a)oracle.com&gt; >>>>>> >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, 14 January 2015, 11:56 >>>>>> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Answer from EL spec lead: no, "." >>>> >>>> is not valid in an EL name. >>>>>> >>>>>> We need to go for both (A) and (B). >>>>>> >>>>>> We would need to deprecate the existing name before we can allow >>>>>> it >>>>>> to >>>> >>>> not be >>>>>> >>>>>> supported. This means CDI 3. So I would suggest we deprecate it in >>>>>> 2, >>>> >>>> add an >>>>>> >>>>>> alternative that can be used, and then consider removing it in CDI >>>>>> 3. >>>> >>>> In the >>>>>> >>>>>> meantime for CDI 2, we will need to improve the TCK to check this >>>>>> more >>>>>> carefully. >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 14 Jan 2015, at 10:09, Romain Manni-Bucau >>>> >>>> <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com&gt; >>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> +1 for B (IMO it is not used that much) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau >>>>>>> @rmannibucau >>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com >>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com >>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2015-01-14 10:54 GMT+01:00 Jozef Hartinger >>>> >>>> <jharting(a)redhat.com&gt;: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think further action is needed on this. Now that it has >>>> >>>> been >>>>>> >>>>>> confirmed >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> that "javax.enterprise.context.conversation" itself >>>> >>>> is not a >>>>>> >>>>>> valid EL >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> name we should either: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> A) Require all CDI implementations to adapt the >>>> >>>> property-based approach >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> which allows this to be implemented portably (as Weld does) >>>>>>>> B) Declare publicly that although the CDI spec declares the >>>> >>>> given name, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> it is a bug and applications should not use the name. (What >>>> >>>> about >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> compatibility with existing applications?) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jozef >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 01/08/2015 09:27 AM, Mark Struberg wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dear CDI fellows! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I've received an answer regarding our EL question >>>> >>>> from the EL >>>>>> >>>>>> Spec Lead. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Ed, thanks for helping us! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> LieGrue, >>>>>>>>> strub >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 6 January 2015, 23:14, Edward Burns >>>>>> >>>>>> <edward.burns(a)oracle.com&gt; wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hello Mark, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> To close this out, no, "." is not valid in >>>> >>>> an EL >>>>>> >>>>>> name. An EL name >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> must >>>>>>>>>> be a java identifier. I'm told this was >>>> >>>> discussed by Pete >>>>>> >>>>>> a long time >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ago in the EL 3.0 EG. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Ed >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> | edward.burns(a)oracle.com | office: +1 407 458 0017 >>>>>>>>>> | 42 days til DevNexus 2015 >>>>>>>>>> | 52 days til JavaLand 2015 >>>>>>>>>> | 62 days til CONFESS 2015 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> 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. >>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> 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. >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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. >>>>