[
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-282?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy...
]
Martin Kouba commented on CDI-282:
----------------------------------
In fact I was thinking of something like this:
{code}
@Vetoed
@Target({ TYPE, METHOD, PARAMETER, FIELD })
@Retention(RUNTIME)
@Documented
@Qualifier
public @interface Predator {
}
/**
* Predator annotation is vetoed. Does it mean the Tiger bean has Any and Default
qualifiers only?
*/
@Predator
public class Tiger {
}
{code}
Vetoing types - clarify consequences
------------------------------------
Key: CDI-282
URL:
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-282
Project: CDI Specification Issues
Issue Type: Clarification
Reporter: Martin Kouba
Assignee: Pete Muir
Priority: Critical
Fix For: 1.1.PFD
The spec currently says {{@Vetoed}} type is *prevented from being considered by CDI* and
{{ProcessAnnotatedType.veto()}} forces the container to ignore the type. This is quite
obvious for classes and interfaces. However not so clear when vetoing annotations (e.g.
qualifier). I think ignoring means not being considered as qualifier (thus affects
resolution). Other (rather theoretical) example is vetoing non-contextual instances -
should it prevent performing dependency injection?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira