[
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-590?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy...
]
Martin Kouba commented on CDI-590:
----------------------------------
bq. it doesn't support a lot of types
I thought a custom producer for any type [can be
implemented|https://github.com/apache/deltaspike/blob/master/deltaspike/c...].
bq. Just use PropertyEditor API...
I don't know what do you mean. Probably {{java.beans.PropertyEditor}}?
bq. Tamaya has its own coercing system which wouldnt fit CDI very well...
For Tamaya I think it would be more meaningful to create a producer for
{{org.apache.tamaya.Configuration}}. But I understand that it would be nice to leverage
{{PropertyConverter}} and produce configuration properties directly.
Look, I'm not against this feature! I'm just trying to identify all pros and cons
;-)
Provide a way to produce any type in a producer
-----------------------------------------------
Key: CDI-590
URL:
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-590
Project: CDI Specification Issues
Issue Type: Epic
Reporter: Romain Manni-Bucau
Note: this is a follow up "adding generic producers to CDI 2.0?" thread on the
list
It is common to rely on a subsystem (another IoC, a coercing system, ...) to produce
values. Today a producer can't say "I produce anything in a safe" manner.
Idea would be for injection point aware producers with a qualifier to producer Object and
match all types.
It needs another flag (can be in @Qualifier or another annotation it is not really
important) to say "I produce safely any type".
I did a PoC on github:
https://github.com/rmannibucau/generic-producer-cdi but think it
can be a nice feature of CDI 2.0 since it would avoid users to have to dig into extensions
for several simple cases (configuration, bridge to other IoC...)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.11#64026)