From: "Mark Struberg" <struberg(a)yahoo.de&gt; To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com&gt; Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2017 9:05:30 PM Subject: Re: [cdi-dev] Extensions and spec-related observer method injection points question > > While you cannot do this, you can still get hold of BeanManager and use it > to resolve your bean. No, you cannot. At least not before AfterBeanValidation.

LieGrue, strub > Am 17.02.2017 um 07:08 schrieb Matej Novotny <manovotn(a)redhat.com&gt;: > > Hi, comment inline. > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Laird Nelson" <ljnelson(a)gmail.com&gt; >> To: cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2017 11:11:41 PM >> Subject: [cdi-dev] Extensions and spec-related observer method injection >> points question >> >> This section ( >> http://docs.jboss.org/cdi/spec/2.0-PFD/cdi-spec.html#init_events ) says: >> "If >> other beans [other than the BeanManager ] are injected into an [portable] >> extension’s observer methods, non-portable behavior results." >> >> Rephrased: a portable extension's observer methods must have a minimum of >> one >> parameter (the event being observed) and a maximum of two parameters (that >> plus the BeanManager ), and none other if you want to stay truly portable. > > That's correct interpretation. > >> For true container lifecycle events, I understand this (you don't have >> beans >> to inject yet). But given that a bean must be provided by the container >> for >> a portable extension ( >> http://docs.jboss.org/cdi/spec/2.0-PFD/cdi-spec.html#init_events ), >> wouldn't >> it be reasonable to permit extra injection points in a portable >> extension's >> non -container-lifecycle-event-observing observer methods? >> >> Concretely, I'd like to do this: >> >> // In my portable extension >> private static final void doSomethingAtStartup(@Observes >> @Initialized(ApplicationScoped.class) final Object event, final >> Frobnicator >> someBean) { >> someBean.doSomething(); >> } > > While you cannot do this, you can still get hold of BeanManager and use it > to resolve your bean. > >> >> ...but that would seem to be in violation of the specification. Could >> someone >> kindly explain why? > > Not really sure, perhaps Martin or Antoine can share the details. > But I would say this could create quite some confusion if in some observer > you could inject certain beans and in others you couldn't. > Even in your sample, you can only inject AppScoped beans, so imagine you do > such observer for, say, SessionScoped, what can you inject there? > SessionScoped for sure, how about Req? Conversation? > >> >> Thanks, >> Best, >> Laird >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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.