Nothing in JSF nor in Servlet, but in CDI 1.2 Specification : *6.7.4. Conversation context lifecycle* *(...)* *The long-running conversation associated with a* *request may be propagated to any Servlet request via use of a request parameter named cid* *containing the unique identifier of the conversation. In this case, the application must manage this* *request parameter.* *(...)* *This is accomplished via use of a request parameter named cid containing the unique* *identifier of the conversation.* *(...)* On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 7:54 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com > wrote: > Hi guys > > didnt find in CDI and JSF PDFs where is defined > "javax.enterprise.context.conversation.id". Seems it should be > available in ELs. > > Do you have any pointer please? > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau > http://www.tomitribe.com > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com > https://github.com/rmannibucau > _______________________________________________ > 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 <http://www.antoniogoncalves.org> | Twitter <http://twitter.com/agoncal> | LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/agoncal> | Pluralsight <http://pluralsight.com/training/Authors/Details/antonio-goncalves> | Paris JUG <http://www.parisjug.org> | Devoxx France <http://www.devoxx.fr>

Nothing in JSF nor in Servlet, but in CDI 1.2 Specification : 6.7.4. Conversation context lifecycle (...) The long-running conversation associated with a request may be propagated to any Servlet request via use of a request parameter named cid containing the unique identifier of the conversation. In this case, the application must manage this request parameter. (...) This is accomplished via use of a request parameter named cid containing the unique identifier of the conversation. (...) On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 7:54 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: Hi guys > >didnt find in CDI and JSF PDFs where is defined >"javax.enterprise.context.conversation.id". Seems it should be >available in ELs. > >Do you have any pointer please? > > >Romain Manni-Bucau >@rmannibucau >http://www.tomitribe.com >http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com >https://github.com/rmannibucau >_______________________________________________ >cdi-dev mailing list &gt;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 _______________________________________________ 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.

On Friday, 2 January 2015, 8:15, Tomas Remes <tremes(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > Hi, I've checked the related TCK test and it seems to me valid. In CDI spec there is: "6.7.5. The Conversation interface The container provides a built-in bean with bean type Conversation , scope @RequestScoped , and qualifier @Default , named javax.enterprise.context.conversation ." Tom ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Struberg" <struberg(a)yahoo.de&gt; To: "Antonio Goncalves" <antonio.goncalves(a)gmail.com&gt;, "Romain Manni-Bucau" <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com&gt; Cc: cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2014 10:57:28 AM Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] where is defined javax.enterprise.context.conversation.id? cid is a different thing. But I did nowhere (spec and api) find the one mentioned by Romain. So I think it's not specified and we need to exclude this test. LieGrue, strub On Monday, 29 December 2014, 21:41, Antonio Goncalves <antonio.goncalves(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > > Nothing in JSF nor in Servlet, but in CDI 1.2 Specification : > > > 6.7.4. Conversation context lifecycle > (...) > The long-running conversation associated with a > request may be propagated to any Servlet request via use of a request parameter named cid > containing the unique identifier of the conversation. In this case, the application must manage this > request parameter. > (...) > > This is accomplished via use of a request parameter named cid containing the unique > identifier of the conversation. > (...) > > > > On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 7:54 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > Hi guys >> >> didnt find in CDI and JSF PDFs where is defined >> "javax.enterprise.context.conversation.id". Seems it should be >> available in ELs. >> >> Do you have any pointer please? >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau >> @rmannibucau >> http://www.tomitribe.com >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com >> https://github.com/rmannibucau >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > _______________________________________________ > 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.

On Friday, 2 January 2015, 11:59, Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de&gt; wrote: > I've grepped all the cdi spec project and this string doesn't appear. When did this got added? LieGrue, strub > On Friday, 2 January 2015, 8:15, Tomas Remes <tremes(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > > > Hi, > > I've checked the related TCK test and it seems to me valid. In CDI spec > there is: > > "6.7.5. The Conversation interface > The container provides a built-in bean with bean type Conversation , scope > @RequestScoped , > and qualifier @Default , named javax.enterprise.context.conversation ." > > Tom > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mark Struberg" <struberg(a)yahoo.de&gt; > To: "Antonio Goncalves" <antonio.goncalves(a)gmail.com&gt;, > "Romain Manni-Bucau" <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com&gt; > Cc: cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2014 10:57:28 AM > Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] where is defined > javax.enterprise.context.conversation.id? > > cid is a different thing. But I did nowhere (spec and api) find the one > mentioned by Romain. > So I think it's not specified and we need to exclude this test. > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > On Monday, 29 December 2014, 21:41, Antonio Goncalves > <antonio.goncalves(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > >> >> >> Nothing in JSF nor in Servlet, but in CDI 1.2 Specification : >> >> >> 6.7.4. Conversation context lifecycle >> (...) >> The long-running conversation associated with a >> request may be propagated to any Servlet request via use of a request > parameter named cid >> containing the unique identifier of the conversation. In this case, the > application must manage this >> request parameter. >> (...) >> >> This is accomplished via use of a request parameter named cid containing the > unique >> identifier of the conversation. >> (...) >> >> >> >> On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 7:54 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau > <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >> >> Hi guys >>> >>> didnt find in CDI and JSF PDFs where is defined >>> "javax.enterprise.context.conversation.id". Seems it should be >>> available in ELs. >>> >>> Do you have any pointer please? >>> >>> >>> Romain Manni-Bucau >>> @rmannibucau >>> http://www.tomitribe.com >>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com >>> https://github.com/rmannibucau >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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. >

Folks, I fear there is another issue: Are dots in EL names even allowed? I think not. Please read up EL-3.0 1.6 Operators [] and . The EL follows ECMAScript in unifying the treatment of the . and [] operators. And in ECMAScript dots are afaik _not_ allowed in names! If it works in some implementations then that is fine, but it is not required by the spec -> non portable. We must not require this in CDI! Gonna ping the servlet EG to get this confirmed. LieGrue, strub > On Friday, 2 January 2015, 12:50, Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de&gt; wrote: > > Forget it, I found it. Maybe I had some typo in my grep... > > > > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > >> On Friday, 2 January 2015, 11:59, Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de&gt; > wrote: >> > I've grepped all the cdi spec project and this string doesn't > appear. >> When did this got added? >> >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Friday, 2 January 2015, 8:15, Tomas Remes <tremes(a)redhat.com&gt; > >> wrote: >>> > >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I've checked the related TCK test and it seems to me valid. In CDI > spec >> >>> there is: >>> >>> "6.7.5. The Conversation interface >>> The container provides a built-in bean with bean type Conversation , > scope >>> @RequestScoped , >>> and qualifier @Default , named javax.enterprise.context.conversation >> ." >>> >>> Tom >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Mark Struberg" <struberg(a)yahoo.de&gt; >>> To: "Antonio Goncalves" <antonio.goncalves(a)gmail.com&gt;, > >>> "Romain Manni-Bucau" <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com&gt; >>> Cc: cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2014 10:57:28 AM >>> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] where is defined >>> javax.enterprise.context.conversation.id? >>> >>> cid is a different thing. But I did nowhere (spec and api) find the > one >>> mentioned by Romain. >>> So I think it's not specified and we need to exclude this test. >>> >>> LieGrue, >>> strub >>> >>> >>> >>> On Monday, 29 December 2014, 21:41, Antonio Goncalves >>> <antonio.goncalves(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Nothing in JSF nor in Servlet, but in CDI 1.2 Specification : >>>> >>>> >>>> 6.7.4. Conversation context lifecycle >>>> (...) >>>> The long-running conversation associated with a >>>> request may be propagated to any Servlet request via use of a > request >>> parameter named cid >>>> containing the unique identifier of the conversation. In this > case, the >> >>> application must manage this >>>> request parameter. >>>> (...) >>>> >>>> This is accomplished via use of a request parameter named cid >> containing the >>> unique >>>> identifier of the conversation. >>>> (...) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 7:54 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau >>> <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi guys >>>>> >>>>> didnt find in CDI and JSF PDFs where is defined >>>>> "javax.enterprise.context.conversation.id". Seems it > >> should be >>>>> available in ELs. >>>>> >>>>> Do you have any pointer please? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau >>>>> @rmannibucau >>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com >>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com >>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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.

On Friday, 2 January 2015, 16:11, Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de&gt; wrote: > but 'dot notation' in ECMAScript means that the dot is used to access properties of a variable: myvar.x is just another way to access myvar["x"] And of course variables inside a variable [1]. Otoh I've found no explicit statement that dots are disallowed neither. LieGrue, strub [1] http://www.ecma-international.org/ecma-262/5.1/#sec-11.2.1 On Friday, 2 January 2015, 15:30, John D. Ament <john.d.ament(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > > As far as I know, dots are allowed in ECMAScript, under dot notation. > > > On Fri Jan 02 2015 at 9:17:38 AM Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de&gt; wrote: > > Folks, I fear there is another issue: >> >> >> Are dots in EL names even allowed? I think not. >> >> Please read up EL-3.0 >> >> 1.6 Operators [] and . >> The EL follows ECMAScript in unifying the treatment of the . and [] operators. >> >> And in ECMAScript dots are afaik _not_ allowed in names! >> >> >> If it works in some implementations then that is fine, but it is not required by the spec -> non portable. We must not require this in CDI! >> >> Gonna ping the servlet EG to get this confirmed. >> >> >> >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >> >> >>> On Friday, 2 January 2015, 12:50, Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de&gt; wrote: >>> > Forget it, I found it. Maybe I had some typo in my grep... >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> LieGrue, >>> strub >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Friday, 2 January 2015, 11:59, Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de&gt; >>> wrote: >>>> > I've grepped all the cdi spec project and this string doesn't >>> appear. >>>> When did this got added? >>>> >>>> LieGrue, >>>> strub >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Friday, 2 January 2015, 8:15, Tomas Remes <tremes(a)redhat.com&gt; >>> >>>> wrote: >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I've checked the related TCK test and it seems to me valid. In CDI >>> spec >>>> >>>>> there is: >>>>> >>>>> "6.7.5. The Conversation interface >>>>> The container provides a built-in bean with bean type Conversation , >>> scope >>>>> @RequestScoped , >>>>> and qualifier @Default , named javax.enterprise.context.conversation >>>> ." >>>>> >>>>> Tom >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> From: "Mark Struberg" <struberg(a)yahoo.de&gt; >>>>> To: "Antonio Goncalves" <antonio.goncalves(a)gmail.com&gt;, >>> >>>>> "Romain Manni-Bucau" <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com&gt; >>>>> Cc: cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2014 10:57:28 AM >>>>> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] where is defined >>>>> javax.enterprise.context.conversation.id? >>>>> >>>>> cid is a different thing. But I did nowhere (spec and api) find the >>> one >>>>> mentioned by Romain. >>>>> So I think it's not specified and we need to exclude this test. >>>>> >>>>> LieGrue, >>>>> strub >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Monday, 29 December 2014, 21:41, Antonio Goncalves >>>>> <antonio.goncalves(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Nothing in JSF nor in Servlet, but in CDI 1.2 Specification : >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 6.7.4. Conversation context lifecycle >>>>>> (...) >>>>>> The long-running conversation associated with a >>>>>> request may be propagated to any Servlet request via use of a >>> request >>>>> parameter named cid >>>>>> containing the unique identifier of the conversation. In this >>> case, the >>>> >>>>> application must manage this >>>>>> request parameter. >>>>>> (...) >>>>>> >>>>>> This is accomplished via use of a request parameter named cid >>>> containing the >>>>> unique >>>>>> identifier of the conversation. >>>>>> (...) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 7:54 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau >>>>> <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi guys >>>>>>> >>>>>>> didnt find in CDI and JSF PDFs where is defined >>>>>>> "javax.enterprise.context.conversation.id". Seems it >>> >>>> should be >>>>>>> available in ELs. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Do you have any pointer please? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau >>>>>>> @rmannibucau >>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com >>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com >>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> 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 >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> 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.

On 01/02/2015 10:10 PM, Mark Struberg wrote: > As far as I've understood after reading 7.6 [1] dots are only allowed if either the dot or the whole variable name is quoted > > a\.b = 42 > > or > > 'a.b' = 42 > > but > > a.b = 42 is illegal. > > > The spec also only says that the BEAN must have this very name and not that the bean must be accessible by EL. Given what the name is for in CDI this can be implied. > If we would really require this and the EL specification doesn't support it, then the CDI spec would contradict the EL spec, right? No, it would mean that the name should be placed within quotes when accessing the conversation bean from EL. > > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > > [1] http://www.ecma-international.org/ecma-262/5.1/#sec-7.6 > > > >> On Friday, 2 January 2015, 16:11, Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de&gt; wrote: >>> but 'dot notation' in ECMAScript means that the dot is used to access >> properties of a variable: >> >> >> myvar.x is just another way to access >> >> myvar["x"] >> And of course variables inside a variable [1]. >> >> >> Otoh I've found no explicit statement that dots are disallowed neither. >> >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >> >> [1] http://www.ecma-international.org/ecma-262/5.1/#sec-11.2.1 >> >> >> On Friday, 2 January 2015, 15:30, John D. Ament <john.d.ament(a)gmail.com&gt; >> wrote: >> >> >>> >>> As far as I know, dots are allowed in ECMAScript, under dot notation. >>> >>> >>> On Fri Jan 02 2015 at 9:17:38 AM Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de&gt; >> wrote: >>> Folks, I fear there is another issue: >>>> >>>> Are dots in EL names even allowed? I think not. >>>> >>>> Please read up EL-3.0 >>>> >>>> 1.6 Operators [] and . >>>> The EL follows ECMAScript in unifying the treatment of the . and [] >> operators. >>>> And in ECMAScript dots are afaik _not_ allowed in names! >>>> >>>> >>>> If it works in some implementations then that is fine, but it is not >> required by the spec -> non portable. We must not require this in CDI! >>>> Gonna ping the servlet EG to get this confirmed. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> LieGrue, >>>> strub >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Friday, 2 January 2015, 12:50, Mark Struberg >> <struberg(a)yahoo.de&gt; wrote: >>>>> > Forget it, I found it. Maybe I had some typo in my grep... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> LieGrue, >>>>> strub >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Friday, 2 January 2015, 11:59, Mark Struberg >> <struberg(a)yahoo.de&gt; >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> > I've grepped all the cdi spec project and this string >> doesn't >>>>> appear. >>>>>> When did this got added? >>>>>> >>>>>> LieGrue, >>>>>> strub >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Friday, 2 January 2015, 8:15, Tomas Remes >> <tremes(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I've checked the related TCK test and it seems to me >> valid. In CDI >>>>> spec >>>>>>> there is: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "6.7.5. The Conversation interface >>>>>>> The container provides a built-in bean with bean type >> Conversation , >>>>> scope >>>>>>> @RequestScoped , >>>>>>> and qualifier @Default , named >> javax.enterprise.context.conversation >>>>>> ." >>>>>>> Tom >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>> From: "Mark Struberg" <struberg(a)yahoo.de&gt; >>>>>>> To: "Antonio Goncalves" >> <antonio.goncalves(a)gmail.com&gt;, >>>>>>> "Romain Manni-Bucau" >> <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com&gt; >>>>>>> Cc: cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2014 10:57:28 AM >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] where is defined >>>>>>> javax.enterprise.context.conversation.id? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> cid is a different thing. But I did nowhere (spec and >> api) find the >>>>> one >>>>>>> mentioned by Romain. >>>>>>> So I think it's not specified and we need to exclude >> this test. >>>>>>> LieGrue, >>>>>>> strub >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Monday, 29 December 2014, 21:41, Antonio Goncalves >>>>>>> <antonio.goncalves(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Nothing in JSF nor in Servlet, but in CDI 1.2 >> Specification : >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 6.7.4. Conversation context lifecycle >>>>>>>> (...) >>>>>>>> The long-running conversation associated with a >>>>>>>> request may be propagated to any Servlet request via >> use of a >>>>> request >>>>>>> parameter named cid >>>>>>>> containing the unique identifier of the conversation. >> In this >>>>> case, the >>>>>>> application must manage this >>>>>>>> request parameter. >>>>>>>> (...) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is accomplished via use of a request parameter >> named cid >>>>>> containing the >>>>>>> unique >>>>>>>> identifier of the conversation. >>>>>>>> (...) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 7:54 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau >>>>>>> <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi guys >>>>>>>>> didnt find in CDI and JSF PDFs where is defined >>>>>>>>> >> "javax.enterprise.context.conversation.id". Seems it >>>>>> should be >>>>>>>>> available in ELs. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Do you have any pointer please? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau >>>>>>>>> @rmannibucau >>>>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com >>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> 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. >> > _______________________________________________ > 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.

>> The spec also only says that the BEAN must have this very name and not that >> the bean must be accessible by EL. > Given what the name is for in CDI this can be implied. well, but it's not up to the CDI impl to do this correctly.

>> If we would really require this and the EL specification doesn't >> support it, then the CDI spec would contradict the EL spec, right? > No, it would mean that the name should be placed within quotes when > accessing the conversation bean from EL. The question is whether it really is defined in the EL spec that way. And further if the EL TCK does test this or if this is non-portable. The TCK test doesn't use escaping for what I saw. So this test is not ok.

Why didn't we simply use underscores instead of dots? :) LieGrue, strub

Well I am not sure. Reading EL spec and ECMA script I can't see any wording which will imply a must to escape or quote the variable in this case. I think the current usage is not forbidden anywhere. I tried to escape or quote the part of variable but it didn't work. The result was considered as String instance or I got ParserException. Tom ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jozef Hartinger" <jharting(a)redhat.com&gt; To: "Mark Struberg" <struberg(a)yahoo.de&gt;, "John D. Ament" <john.d.ament(a)gmail.com&gt;, "Tomas Remes" <tremes(a)redhat.com&gt; Cc: cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org Sent: Monday, January 5, 2015 4:19:16 PM Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] where is defined javax.enterprise.context.conversation.id? On 01/05/2015 10:09 AM, Mark Struberg wrote: >>> The spec also only says that the BEAN must have this very name and not that >>> the bean must be accessible by EL. >> Given what the name is for in CDI this can be implied. > > well, but it's not up to the CDI impl to do this correctly. No, my point was that if a bean is given a name it implies that this bean should be accessible via EL. > > >>> If we would really require this and the EL specification doesn't >>> support it, then the CDI spec would contradict the EL spec, right? >> No, it would mean that the name should be placed within quotes when >> accessing the conversation bean from EL. > > The question is whether it really is defined in the EL spec that way. And further if the EL TCK does test this or if this is non-portable. The TCK test doesn't use escaping for what I saw. So this test is not ok. Right, the TCK test should be fixed to escape the name properly. > > > Why didn't we simply use underscores instead of dots? :) > > > LieGrue, > strub _______________________________________________ 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.

Dne 6.1.2015 v 12:53 Romain Manni-Bucau napsal(a): > > Well it is quite explicit: > > 1.6 Operators [] and . > The EL follows ECMAScript in unifying the treatment of the . and [] > operators. > expr-a.identifier-b is equivalent to expr-a[“identifier-b”]; that is, the > identifier identifier-b is used to construct a literal whose value is > the identifier, > and then the [] operator is used with that value. > > so javax.enterprise.context.conversation.id = > javax["enterprise"]["context"]["conversation"]["id"]. > > If then you follow the EL resolution agorithm there is no way which > can match our name case - It's possible although not very convenient. A custom ELResolver can handle these "virtual" properties. Weld builds a special namespace hierarchy, so that for instance javax["enterprise"] returns a Namespace object which has a virtual property "context" of type Namespace, etc. Again it's not nice and certainly not efficient. But it's not forbidden imho. and EL is only inspired from ECMA and doesnt > > follow all its rules. > > The best would be to add a "cdi" object (whatever name it is while it > is compliant) and to allow: > > ${cdi['javax.enterprise.context.conversation']} syntax, exactly like > requestScope can be used to get javax.servlet.* properties. Yep, this might be a better approach. > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau > http://www.tomitribe.com > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com > https://github.com/rmannibucau > > > 2015-01-06 12:46 GMT+01:00 Tomas Remes <tremes(a)redhat.com&gt;: >> >> >> Well I am not sure. Reading EL spec and ECMA script I can't see any >> wording which will imply a must to escape or quote the variable in this >> case. I think the current usage is not forbidden anywhere. I tried to escape >> or quote the part of variable but it didn't work. The result was considered >> as String instance or I got ParserException. >> >> Tom >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Jozef Hartinger" <jharting(a)redhat.com&gt; >> To: "Mark Struberg" <struberg(a)yahoo.de&gt;, "John D. Ament" >> <john.d.ament(a)gmail.com&gt;, "Tomas Remes" <tremes(a)redhat.com&gt; >> Cc: cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> Sent: Monday, January 5, 2015 4:19:16 PM >> Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] where is defined >> javax.enterprise.context.conversation.id? >> >> >> On 01/05/2015 10:09 AM, Mark Struberg wrote: >>>>> >>>>> The spec also only says that the BEAN must have this very name and not >>>>> that >>>>> the bean must be accessible by EL. >>>> >>>> Given what the name is for in CDI this can be implied. >>> >>> >>> well, but it's not up to the CDI impl to do this correctly. >> >> No, my point was that if a bean is given a name it implies that this >> bean should be accessible via EL. >>> >>> >>> >>>>> If we would really require this and the EL specification doesn't >>>>> support it, then the CDI spec would contradict the EL spec, right? >>>> >>>> No, it would mean that the name should be placed within quotes when >>>> accessing the conversation bean from EL. >>> >>> >>> The question is whether it really is defined in the EL spec that way. >>> And further if the EL TCK does test this or if this is non-portable. The TCK >>> test doesn't use escaping for what I saw. So this test is not ok. >> >> Right, the TCK test should be fixed to escape the name properly. >> >>> >>> >>> Why didn't we simply use underscores instead of dots? :) >>> >>> >>> LieGrue, >>> strub >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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. > -- Martin Kouba Software Engineer Red Hat, Czech Republic