Re: [seam-dev] Interceptor packaging convention
On 11 Apr 2010, at 05:11, Gavin King wrote:
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 7:23 AM, Pete Muir <pmuir(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
> BTW A slightly better approach (which avoids at least the nastiness of this approach,
but
> doesn't avoid the issue of ordering - which IMO is insurmountable) is to write
a
> SeamInterceptor which can cope with using relative ordering semantics and require
users
> to just enable that.
Sure, but the problem is that then you can't interleave other
interceptors with the Seam interceptors.
Perhaps I should have prefaced it "a slightly better-than-terrible way" ;-)