Hi, Wouldn't it be convenient as the CDI API that now requires an Annotation instance in various APIs, would also accept the class type of that Annotation? E.g. in BeanManager there's this method: Set<Bean<?>> getBeans(Type beanType, Annotation... qualifiers) This not rarely requires one to create an AnnotationLiteral, which is not specifically difficult but a tad verbose. For qualifiers that have no (binding) attributes, a simple Class would be much easier to use. Thoughts? Kind regards, Arjan Tijms _______________________________________________ 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.

Type safety is not guaranteed in the current version of AnnotationInstanceProvider (deltaspike). We should at least check the provided map of member values against the set of declared methods. Otherwise, I like the idea of standardizing a similar "annotation instance builder". Martin Dne 12.9.2016 v 12:34 Romain Manni-Bucau napsal(a): > Think it is maybe saner to have AnnotationProvider.of(type, params) > (like in deltaspike) since it doesnt leave the parameterized annotations > (which are not rare) next the road. > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > <https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> | Old Wordpress Blog > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber > <http://www.tomitribe.com> | JavaEE Factory > <https://javaeefactory-rmannibucau.rhcloud.com> > > 2016-09-12 12:28 GMT+02:00 arjan tijms <arjan.tijms(a)gmail.com > <mailto:arjan.tijms@gmail.com>>: > > Hi, > > Wouldn't it be convenient as the CDI API that now requires an > Annotation instance in various APIs, would also accept the class > type of that Annotation? > > E.g. in BeanManager there's this method: > > Set<Bean<?>> getBeans(Type beanType, Annotation... qualifiers) > > This not rarely requires one to create an AnnotationLiteral, which > is not specifically difficult but a tad verbose. For qualifiers that > have no (binding) attributes, a simple Class would be much easier to > use. > > Thoughts? > > Kind regards, > Arjan Tijms > > _______________________________________________ > cdi-dev mailing list > cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev > <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 > <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/license > s/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. > >

Hi, Annotation builder would be +1. It's a tiny bit less convenient, but more universal. So better for the spec. Convenience addition could theoretically still be: Set<Bean<?>> getBeans(Type beanType, Class<?> annotationType, Object... annotation attributes); But... I acknowledge that this would again be for a more specific situation (namely, a bean with exactly 1 qualifier and 0 or more binding attributes). While on the subject, it's currently not possible for an injected bean to get hold of the annotation instance that's used in CDI.current().select(), BeanManager.getBeans, etc, is it? Kind regards, Arjan Tijms On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Martin Kouba <mkouba(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: Type safety is not guaranteed in the current version of AnnotationInstanceProvider (deltaspike). We should at least check the provided map of member values against the set of declared methods. Otherwise, I like the idea of standardizing a similar "annotation instance builder". > >Martin > >Dne 12.9.2016 v 12:34 Romain Manni-Bucau napsal(a): > >Think it is maybe saner to have AnnotationProvider.of(type, params) >>(like in deltaspike) since it doesnt leave the parameterized annotations >>(which are not rare) next the road. >> >> >>Romain Manni-Bucau >> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibuc au> | Blog >><https://blog-rmannibucau.rhcl oud.com> | Old Wordpress Blog >><http://rmannibucau.wordpress. com> | Github >><https://github.com/rmannibuca u> | LinkedIn >><https://www.linkedin.com/in/r mannibucau> | Tomitriber >><http://www.tomitribe.com> | JavaEE Factory >><https://javaeefactory-rmannib ucau.rhcloud.com> >> >>2016-09-12 12:28 GMT+02:00 arjan tijms <arjan.tijms(a)gmail.com >> <mailto:arjan.tijms@gmail.com> >: >> >> Hi, >> >> Wouldn't it be convenient as the CDI API that now requires an >> Annotation instance in various APIs, would also accept the class >> type of that Annotation? >> >> E.g. in BeanManager there's this method: >> >> Set<Bean<?>> getBeans(Type beanType, Annotation... qualifiers) >> >> This not rarely requires one to create an AnnotationLiteral, which >> is not specifically difficult but a tad verbose. For qualifiers that >> have no (binding) attributes, a simple Class would be much easier to >> use. >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Kind regards, >> Arjan Tijms >> >> ______________________________ _________________ >> cdi-dev mailing list >> cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:cdi-dev@lists.jboss.or g> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailma n/listinfo/cdi-dev >> <https://lists.jboss.org/mailm an/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/license s/LICENSE-2.0.html >> <http://www.apache.org/license s/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 &gt;&gt;cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>https://lists.jboss.org/mailma n/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/license s/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.

Just a naive remark regarding Instance of annotations without members. I already used a lambda to have such an instance: BeanManager.getBeans(MyBean.class, () -> MyQualifier.class)

I’m not sure there are no problem by using this short cut, but it is quite convenient. Antoine > Le 12 sept. 2016 à 12:28, arjan tijms <arjan.tijms(a)gmail.com&gt; a écrit : > > Hi, > > Wouldn't it be convenient as the CDI API that now requires an Annotation instance in various APIs, would also accept the class type of that Annotation? > > E.g. in BeanManager there's this method: > > Set<Bean<?>> getBeans(Type beanType, Annotation... qualifiers) > > This not rarely requires one to create an AnnotationLiteral, which is not specifically difficult but a tad verbose. For qualifiers that have no (binding) attributes, a simple Class would be much easier to use. > > Thoughts? > > Kind regards, > Arjan Tijms > _______________________________________________ > 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.

> Le 15 sept. 2016 à 10:26, Martin Kouba <mkouba(a)redhat.com&gt; a écrit : > > Dne 15.9.2016 v 10:15 Antoine Sabot-Durand napsal(a): >> Just a naive remark regarding Instance of annotations without members. I already used a lambda to have such an instance: >> >> BeanManager.getBeans(MyBean.class, () -> MyQualifier.class) > > What is this cryptic unclear lambda thing doing actually? I know it compiles but I don't understand… It compiles and works every the time I used it. From my understanding it’s a short cut for BeanManager.getBeans(MyBean.class, new Annotation() { @Override public Class<? extends Annotation> annotationType() { return MyQualifier.class; } }) Which by the way also works. From your answer I guess it’s a bad solution ;), but I’d be happy to know why and what is the side effect makes it work.

Thanks, Antoine > >> >> I’m not sure there are no problem by using this short cut, but it is quite convenient. >> >> Antoine >> >> >>> Le 12 sept. 2016 à 12:28, arjan tijms <arjan.tijms(a)gmail.com&gt; a écrit : >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Wouldn't it be convenient as the CDI API that now requires an Annotation instance in various APIs, would also accept the class type of that Annotation? >>> >>> E.g. in BeanManager there's this method: >>> >>> Set<Bean<?>> getBeans(Type beanType, Annotation... qualifiers) >>> >>> This not rarely requires one to create an AnnotationLiteral, which is not specifically difficult but a tad verbose. For qualifiers that have no (binding) attributes, a simple Class would be much easier to use. >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> Arjan Tijms >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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. >>