My argument was not about getting the info but what to do with it. It most times affects
our proxies.
I’ve now also found a small project called dexmaker which can create bytecode for the
dalvik VM on the fly
https://github.com/crittercism/dexmaker
I have no idea if this work with ART though.
If this turns out to work fine then we could even move full CDI to android.
But there are lots of experiments in front of us.
LieGrue,
strub
> Am 02.09.2015 um 13:26 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com>:
>
>
> Le 2 sept. 2015 12:55, "Mark Struberg" <struberg(a)yahoo.de> a écrit :
> >
> > Oki, sorry, was too unprecise.
> >
> > Yes, you can use compile time annotations. But you cannot use runtime
annotations in Android afaik.
> > Thus all the parsing, AnnotatedType stuff, etc would basically be pretty moot,
right?
> >
>
> You can compute it at compile time. The point being it is ourside cdispec.
>
> > +1 for reaching out to the AeroGear team btw.
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
> >
> > > Am 02.09.2015 um 10:30 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau
<rmannibucau(a)gmail.com>:
> > >
> > >
> > > 2015-09-02 10:22 GMT+02:00 Werner Keil <werner.keil(a)gmail.com>:
> > > >Forget about all the Android area for now. In android there are not
even Annotations afaik. And Android is NOT Java. The runtime and all the bytecode stuff we
do here wont work that easily. So we would get rid of TONS of neat stuff a >JavaSE app
most of the times would LOVE to have.
> > >
> > > This was still from Square's time, but shows at least @Qualifier or
@Module annotations (aside from the obvious @Override) so it looks like some annotations
do work for Android
> > >
https://github.com/square/dagger/tree/master/examples/android-simple
> > >
> > > Can't speak for JBoss or Red Hat here, but at least their AeroGear
native libraries for Android
https://aerogear.org/android/ speak a rather clear language,
and should any of CDI lite be usable to both Java SE and Android I am sure, AeroGear would
happily offer it there;-)
> > >
> > >
> > > Android supports all annotations you want while it doesnt hit the device
but the codegen phase during the *build* (
http://androidannotations.org/ for instance).
That is what does dagger AFAIK.
> > >
> > > Werner
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 10:04 AM, <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: Time to start working on CDI lite (Mark Struberg)
> > > 2. F2F more information regarding the location (Antoine Sabot-Durand)
> > > 3. [JBoss JIRA] (CDI-556) JavaEE component classes injection
> > > support mode (Emily Jiang (JIRA))
> > > 4. ? Lies Deine Nachricht, bevor sie gel?scht wird! (Notme)
> > >
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Message: 1
> > > Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 11:30:49 +0200
> > > From: Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de>
> > > Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Time to start working on CDI lite
> > > To: Antonio Goncalves <antonio.goncalves(a)gmail.com>
> > > Cc: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > > Message-ID: <19E62B90-B7E2-40F6-9E69-139D8AB3D92C(a)yahoo.de>
> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I don't see Events in a "Lite" version because the other
DI frameworks don't use them. A "fatter" 330 with producers, programmatic
lookup and bootstrap, could be "easily" implemented by Spring, Guice... If we
leave events in a Lite version, then it won?t be the case, and Weld and OWB will be the
only two implementations.
> > >
> > > No, it?s not an impl thing at all but all the Extension events and it?s
usage are specified deep in the CDI spec.
> > > Of course the impls could use different code parts for Extension events and
?user events? but you still would need an event bus OR you would get rid of Extensions
alltogether. But that would be pretty insane imo ;)
> > >
> > > There is also no need to go further in the JSR-330-only area. All CDI
containers must pass the atinject TCK and thus are fully certified JSR-330 containers as
well. Add guice, Spring, picocontainer, etc to this. There is really no need to go down
even further in this road imo. We are not here for world domination. We don?t need to do
_every_ situation. Let?s instead do OUR main goal really well.
> > >
> > >
> > > > If you take back Antoine sentence "This would allow using CDI in
constrained environment like mobile or embedded devices", then I don't think
events would fit here.
> > >
> > >
> > > Forget about all the Android area for now. In android there are not even
Annotations afaik. And Android is NOT Java. The runtime and all the bytecode stuff we do
here wont work that easily. So we would get rid of TONS of neat stuff a JavaSE app most of
the times would LOVE to have.
> > >
> > >
> > > IF we say that CDI-lite is targetting android then this is fine as well.
But then we aim for a TOTALLY different goal! This would not even be useful in a SE. If
you really like to have a lightweight-as-possible DI container, such a project already
exists. It is called Apache Avalon [1] and got written in 1999. So it even predates Spring
for about 5 years?
> > >
> > > LieGrue,
> > > strub
> > >
> > > [1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Avalon
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Am 31.08.2015 um 09:57 schrieb Antonio Goncalves
<antonio.goncalves(a)gmail.com>:
> > > >
> > > > I don't see Events in a "Lite" version because the other
DI frameworks don't use them. A "fatter" 330 with producers, programmatic
lookup and bootstrap, could be "easily" implemented by Spring, Guice... If we
leave events in a Lite version, then it won't be the case, and Weld and OWB will be
the only two implementations.
> > > >
> > > > For me, a Lite version would just be about DI. If Weld uses events
internally to archieve basic DI, well, it's just an implementation decision, not a
spec. I would not even try to standardize the way @Inject works (like Romain said, @Inject
doesn't work the same in Weld or Spring), let's leave it like this. If you take
back Antoine sentence "This would allow using CDI in constrained environment like
mobile or embedded devices", then I don't think events would fit here.
> > > >
> > > > Antonio
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 8:25 AM, Mark Struberg
<struberg(a)yahoo.de> wrote:
> > > > > For me, a Light version of CDI is clearly the features number.
That's why I don't see events in it.
> > > >
> > > > We did discuss this last year on the f2f meeting. The problem lies
within our Extension mechanism. Without events you also need to drop the Extension
mechanism. And to be honest, this is THE major hit in all CDI?
> > > > Sorry to be the bad guy busting all those ideas. I really don?t want
to, but better now than too late down the road ;)
> > > >
> > > > It?s really tricky as many features are heavily based on each other.
E.g. by removing scanning you could get rid of javassist/asm/etc ? nope, we also have our
class proxies which need bytecode tinkering. So remove interceptors and decorators too?
Well yea, but we still have normalscoping -> what is left? basically spring prototype
and singleton. Hmm. that?s not that much compared to full CDI. And all that for only
200kByte?
> > > > (Btw we also discussed generating the bytecode classes at build time,
but then we still miss the dynamics we get from Extensions, e.g. PAT adding an interceptor
annotation)
> > > > Just to give you a rough idea how this all works together when it
comes to implementation details?
> > > > Please feel free to ask Jozef and me for further infos on
?dependencies?.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > LieGrue,
> > > > strub
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Am 30.08.2015 um 18:09 schrieb Antonio Goncalves
<antonio.goncalves(a)gmail.com>:
> > > > >
> > > > > For me, a Light version of CDI is clearly the features number.
That's why I don't see events in it.
> > > > >
> > > > > For me, a CDI Lite would just focus on DI. If CDI has @Produces
and Spring has @Bean, then it's because 330 lakes this functionality.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
<rmannibucau(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Lite can have several definition, let's try to list them up
if it can help:
> > > > >
> > > > > - binary size: for me until 3M for an app it is "Lite"
> > > > > - features number: the whole IoC set of feature is light since
you almost always need it, it means you can do lighter but it wouldnt be used - check
spring, who uses only spring-ioc and not context or more?
> > > > > - features complexity: sure we are not light here but supporting
scopes already breaks "Lite-ness" IMO so not a real issue
> > > > >
> > > > > So my view is CDI "SE" is light enough - as a spec and
spec can't affect implementations so seems the fight is not on the right side to me.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > @rmannibucau | Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Tomitriber
> > > > >
> > > > > 2015-08-30 15:57 GMT+02:00 Antonio Goncalves
<antonio.goncalves(a)gmail.com>:
> > > > > It's funny, I feel I'm in Rod Johnson shoes back in Java
EE 6 where he forked 330 because he found CDI was doing too much ;o)
> > > > >
> > > > > For me, "CDI Lite" was just basic dependency injection.
The fact that CDI can now run on SE (like JPA....), is good... but for me it has nothing
to do with Light : it's the entire thing that can bootstrap in SE. Good.
> > > > >
> > > > > So what is Lite for you guys ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Antonio
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 3:44 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
<rmannibucau(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > 2015-08-30 15:22 GMT+02:00 John D. Ament
<john.d.ament(a)gmail.com>:
> > > > > Personally, I'm not in favor of a slimmed down runtime. It
was tried with EJB, but never implemented properly (most implementations that support
EJB-lite actually support the entire thing, except for deprecated stuff).
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > +1, most of CDI is basic and quickly any light version will miss
events or other thing - in particular in maintaining micro services from experience. Size
of an implementation can easily be < 1M so not sure it would bring anything. Only
important point is what Antoine started to do ie ensuring EE and SE parts are clearly
identified and split in the spec.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think if we define SE properly we won't have a need for
this.
> > > > >
> > > > > John
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 8:07 AM Antonio Goncalves
<antonio.goncalves(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > @Antoine, so which content do you see in CDI Lite ? Are you sure
about events ?
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm in favor of a "fatter" 330 that would have :
> > > > > ? @Inject : already there
> > > > > ? @Qualifier : already there
> > > > > ? Producers and disposers
> > > > > ? Programatic lookup
> > > > > ? Java SE Bootstrap
> > > > > When you say "The goal here is not to propose a new EE
profile but a subspec", 330 could already be seen as a subspec. If you put events
apparts, what would be missing in this list in your point of view ? And what obstacles do
you see in archieving this ?
> > > > >
> > > > > To boostrap CDI we have a CDIProvider, why not having an
InjectionProvider just to bootstrap 330 (then, CDIProvider could extend InjectionProvider,
so it bootstraps the all thing) ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Antonio
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Antoine Sabot-Durand
<antoine(a)sabot-durand.net> wrote:
> > > > > Yes Arjan, I think it's the first reason. We really should
work with them to understand what should be added to CDI 2.0 to have it as a first citizen
DI in their spec.
> > > > >
> > > > > Le sam. 29 ao?t 2015 ? 23:15, arjan tijms
<arjan.tijms(a)gmail.com> a ?crit :
> > >
> > > > > On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 8:45 PM, Antonio Goncalves
> > > > > <antonio.goncalves(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > I remember talking with the JAX-RS guys (Java EE), years ago
(back in EE6),
> > > > > > and their answer for not adopting CDI was "too
heavy".
> > > > >
> > > > > I can't find an exact reference anymore, but I somewhat
remember that
> > > > > one of the reasons was also simply that CDI as a general
solution
> > > > > finished late in Java EE 6, while JAX-RS finished earlier and had
all
> > > > > the work for their own DI solution already done.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Antonio Goncalves
> > > > > Software architect, Java Champion and Pluralsight author
> > > > >
> > > > > Web site | Twitter | LinkedIn | Pluralsight | Paris JUG | Devoxx
France
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Antonio Goncalves
> > > > > Software architect, Java Champion and Pluralsight author
> > > > >
> > > > > Web site | Twitter | LinkedIn | Pluralsight | Paris JUG | Devoxx
France
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Antonio Goncalves
> > > > > Software architect, Java Champion and Pluralsight author
> > > > >
> > > > > Web site | Twitter | LinkedIn | Pluralsight | Paris JUG | Devoxx
France
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Antonio Goncalves
> > > > Software architect, Java Champion and Pluralsight author
> > > >
> > > > Web site | Twitter | LinkedIn | Pluralsight | Paris JUG | Devoxx
France
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > > Message: 2
> > > Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2015 12:04:12 +0000
> > > From: Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine(a)sabot-durand.net>
> > > Subject: [cdi-dev] F2F more information regarding the location
> > > To: cdi-dev <cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > > Message-ID:
> > >
<CABu-YBTubzLZ3+SRq++dJ+fM21_rodTsL6zK_c-GPr7TsDMpGQ(a)mail.gmail.com>
> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> > >
> > > Hi guys,
> > >
> > > I've updated the F2F sheet :
> > >
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Frlfv39Nixalt783dx6Yv7rvYWuFcouml...
> > >
> > > The tab location contains info for the event location and a suggested
hotel
> > > nearby.
> > >
> > > Remember the community meeting will be on Friday 25th and Saturday 26th
> > >
> > > Antoine
> > >