WELD-862 and Seam Cron
by Peter Royle
Hi,
I'm aiming to make a release of Seam Cron available within the next two weeks. Currently there is an outstanding issue (https://issues.jboss.org/browse/WELD-862) which prevents Cron from running properly with Weld. I have been able to carry on developing Cron by testing it against OpenWebBeans, but obviously if we are to release a Seam module it should work against Weld.
It would be nice if WELD-862 could be fixed as soon a possible so that all future versions will work well with Cron.
But more importantly I also probably need to do something special in Cron so that it will work with the version of Weld already deployed in JBoss AS and Glassfish, which will contain the bug. The workaround mentioned in the bug report is to deep copy the InvocationContext. I attempted to do this by serialising and unserialising the InvocationContext but couldn't due to UnserializableExceptions. Does anyone have any advice for me about how I might be able to work around this bug to support existing versions of Weld?
Cheers,
Pete R
4 days, 14 hours
Re: [weld-dev] Weld and Java 9 JPMS
by Matej Novotny
Uhm, is there anything blocking you from placing it where you would in Java 8?
E.g. src/main/resources/META-INF?
I don't think I have tried this combination (or I do not recall).
>From the top of my head I don't know any JDK 9 limitation which would forbid to use XML descriptors in this way.
I might be a bit rusty though; been a while since I played with Java 9.
Please do report back with how this works for you :)
Matej
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alex Sviridov" <ooo_saturn7(a)mail.ru>
> To: "Matej Novotny" <manovotn(a)redhat.com>
> Sent: Monday, September 18, 2017 10:28:11 AM
> Subject: Re[2]: [weld-dev] Weld and Java 9 JPMS
>
> Thank you for your answer. I will try. But where should I place beans.xml
> to make Weld read it if I use Java SE+ JPMS?
>
> Best regards, Alex
>
>
> >Понедельник, 18 сентября 2017, 8:10 +03:00 от Matej Novotny
> ><manovotn(a)redhat.com>:
> >
> >Hi Alex
> >
> >Back there we did some tests with earlier versions of Java 9 and eliminated
> >some crucial problems.
> >I think it should be possible to take *existing* app and run it on Java 9.
> >
> >However, creating a whole new modular project might present some additional
> >challenges.
> >Weld itself is not modularized (since it needs to run on Java 8), therefore
> >you would need to list some extra "requires" in module-info.java for Weld.
> >You also need to have reflection access allowed (we need to instantiate
> >proxies etc) but last time I checked, it was by default enabled in JDK 9 wi
> >th just warning showing up.
> >Other than that, it might just work.
> >
> >To answer your other question - no, there is no tutorial, for there is no
> >special difference between Weld and many other projects in regard to JDK 9.
> >
> >Matej
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Alex Sviridov" < ooo_saturn7(a)mail.ru >
> >> To: "weld-dev" < weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >
> >> Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2017 3:25:49 PM
> >> Subject: [weld-dev] Weld and Java 9 JPMS
> >>
> >> Hi all
> >>
> >> Could anyone provide information how weld works (if works) with Java 9
> >> JPMS?
> >> Is there any tutorial?
> >>
> >> Best regards, Alex
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> weld-dev mailing list
> >> weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev
>
>
> --
> Alex Sviridov
>
8 years, 3 months
Weld and Java 9 JPMS
by Alex Sviridov
Hi all
Could anyone provide information how weld works (if works) with Java 9 JPMS?
Is there any tutorial?
Best regards, Alex
8 years, 3 months
Re: [weld-dev] Fwd: Re[2]: How to make method injection when bean subclass is required in Weld?
by Martin Kouba
This is expected. See also assignability rules [1].
You need to use TypeLiteral [2]:
instance.select(new TypeLiteral<Temp<Foo>>() {})
Martin
[1]
https://docs.jboss.org/cdi/spec/2.0/cdi-spec.html#assignable_parameters
[2]
https://docs.jboss.org/cdi/spec/2.0/cdi-spec.html#annotationliteral_typel...
Dne 4.9.2017 v 20:47 Alex Sviridov napsal(a):
> Hi Martin,
>
> I am back with question about your solution. I have class Temp<Foo> and I
> create CDI bean using Instance.select(Temp.class).get().
>
> However, I get Caused by:
> org.jboss.weld.exceptions.UnsatisfiedResolutionException: WELD-001334:
> Unsatisfied dependencies for type Temp with qualifiers @Default.
>
> Could you say, how your solution can be used to create bean with generic?
>
> Best regards, Alex
>
>
>
> Четверг, 31 августа 2017, 12:50 +03:00 от Martin Kouba
> <mkouba(a)redhat.com>:
>
> Hi Alex,
>
> 1) should work but looks a little bit cumbersome. WRT 2) you should
> avoid using BeanManager to create a bean instance whenever possible.
> And
> in this particular case, if SimpleFoo is @Dependent it wouldn't be
> destroyed correctly (@PreDestroy) when Parent or Child is destroyed.
>
> The following should also work (no need to have two Instance IPs):
>
> public class Parent {
>
> @Inject
> private Instance<SimpleFoo> fooInstance;
>
> private SimpleFoo foo;
>
> protected SimpleFoo newFoo() {
> return fooInstance.get();
> }
>
> @PostConstruct
> private void doPostConstruct() {
> foo = newFoo();
> }
> }
>
> public class Child extends Parent {
>
> @Override
> protected AdvancedFoo newFoo() {
> return fooInstance.select(AdvancedFoo.class).get();
> }
> }
>
>
> Martin
>
> Dne 31.8.2017 v 11:07 Alex Sviridov napsal(a):
> > Hi Martin,
> >
> >
> > Could you comment the following solutions?
> >
> > 1)
> > public class Parent {
> >
> > @Inject
> > private Instance<SimpleFoo> fooInstance;
> >
> > private SimpleFoo foo;
> >
> > protected SimpleFoo newFoo() {
> > return fooInstance.get();
> > }
> >
> > @PostConstruct
> > private void doPostConstruct() {
> > foo = newFoo();
> > }
> > }
> >
> > public class Child extends Parent {
> >
> > @Inject
> > private Instance<AdvancedFoo> fooInstance;
> >
> > @Override
> > protected AdvancedFoo newFoo() {
> > return fooInstance.get();
> > }
> > }
> >
> >
> > 2)
> >
> > public class Parent {
> >
> > @Inject
> > protected BeanManager beanManager;
> >
> > private SimpleFoo foo;
> >
> > protected SimpleFoo newFoo() {
> > SimpleFoo foo = constructing bean with BM;
> > return foo;
> > }
> >
> > @PostConstruct
> > private void doPostConstruct() {
> > foo = newFoo();
> > }
> > }
> >
> > public class Child extends Parent {
> >
> > @Override
> > protected AdvancedFoo newFoo() {
> > AdvancedFoo foo = constructing bean with BM;
> > return foo;
> > }
> > }
> >
> >
> > Best regards, Alex
> >
> > Среда, 30 августа 2017, 10:51 +03:00 от Matej Novotny
> > <manovotn(a)redhat.com <mailto:manovotn@redhat.com>
> <mailto:manovotn@redhat.com <mailto:manovotn@redhat.com>>>:
> >
> > 1) If you inject Instance<T>, you still have the ambiguous
> > dependency issue for any class which does have a subclass.
> > E.g. from your sample:
> >
> > @Inject
> > Instance<SimpleFoo> instance;
> >
> > //within some method
> > instance.get(); -> this will blow up because you have two beans
> > which have SimpleFoo type (SimpleFoo and AdvancedFoo)
> >
> > 2) I don't understand what you mean by this. How does BM help here?
> >
> >
> > Sidenote:
> > You might want to try and use what Martin said - limiting the types
> > of a bean with @Typed(MyClass.Foo).
> > That way you have control over the bean types and can further
> > manupulate the injection.
> > Limit all your children to only the actual subclass type they have:
> >
> > @Dependent
> > @Typed(AdvancedFoo.class)
> > public class AdvancedFoo extends SimpleFoo {
> > // this ben now only has a bean of AdvancedFoo, e.g. it does not
> > fit into injection point for SimpleFoo
> > }
> >
> > And then override the initializer methods like this:
> >
> > @Dependent
> > public class Parent extends Child {
> >
> > @Inject
> > @Override
> > protected void setFoo(AdvancedFoo foo) {
> > this.foo = foo; // assuming foo is a protected field
> > }
> > }
> >
> > Matej
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Alex Sviridov" <ooo_saturn7(a)mail.ru
> <mailto:ooo_saturn7@mail.ru>
> > <mailto:ooo_saturn7@mail.ru <mailto:ooo_saturn7@mail.ru>>>
> > > To: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> <mailto:weld-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> > <mailto:weld-dev@lists.jboss.org <mailto:weld-dev@lists.jboss.org>>>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2017 8:54:47 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [weld-dev] How to make method injection when bean
> > subclass is required in Weld?
> > >
> > > I thought here, and would like to share my ideas hoping to get
> > comments from
> > > more experienced people.
> > >
> > > First of all I came to conclusion that CDI works badly with cases
> > when we
> > > need
> > > to change field values in super classes. If there is a lot of
> > inheritance as
> > > in my case:
> > > ParentA, ChildA0, ChildA1.., ParentB, ChildB0, ChildB1..,... then
> > situation
> > > is
> > > becoming very bad. Maybe in future there will be other solutions
> > in CDI
> > > specs.
> > >
> > > I found two additional ways that can be used. 1) Inject not
> beans but
> > > instances,
> > > + method SimpleFoo newFoo {return Instance<SimpleFoo>.get} +
> > overriding.
> > > 2) Inject BeanManager + method SimpleFoo newFoo()
> {beanManager...} +
> > > overriding.
> > >
> > > Maybe such ways can be named lazy/postponed initialization with
> > overriding
> > > support....
> > >
> > > Best regards, Alex
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Вторник, 29 августа 2017, 18:22 +03:00 от Martin Kouba
> > <mkouba(a)redhat.com <mailto:mkouba@redhat.com>
> <mailto:mkouba@redhat.com <mailto:mkouba@redhat.com>>>:
> > >
> > > Hi Alex,
> > >
> > > that's an interesting question. Indeed, qualifiers are the way to
> > go if
> > > you need to keep the method signature.
> > >
> > > Another way could be to override the setFoo() method so that the
> > Child
> > > initializer is ignored and add a new method to inject AdvancedFoo:
> > >
> > > @Override
> > > protected void setFoo(SimpleFoo foo) { // Do nothing }
> > >
> > > @Inject
> > > void setAdvancedFoo(AdvancedFoo foo) {
> > > super.setFoo(foo);
> > > }
> > >
> > > However, note that right now there are the following beans:
> > >
> > > SimpleFoo with bean types Object, SimpleFoo
> > > AdvancedFoo -> Object, SimpleFoo, AdvancedFoo
> > >
> > > So if you do @Inject SimpleFoo you get ambiguous dependency
> exception
> > > because both SimpleFoo and AdvancedFoo are eligible for injection.
> > >
> > > To resolve this you need to use qualifiers or restrict the bean
> > types of
> > > AdvancedFoo:
> > >
> > > @Typed(AdvancedFoo.class)
> > > class AdvancedFoo extends SimpleFoo {}
> > >
> > > HTH
> > >
> > > Martin
> > >
> > >
> > > Dne 29.8.2017 v 15:09 Matej Novotny napsal(a):
> > > > Hi Alex,
> > > >
> > > > no need to be sorry, you have come to the right place :)
> > > > As for your question, the simplest thing is probably to use
> > qualifiers.
> > > >
> > > > Create your own like this:
> > > >
> > > > @Qualifier
> > > > @Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
> > > > @Target({ ElementType.TYPE, ElementType.PARAMETER,
> > ElementType.FIELD,
> > > > ElementType.METHOD })
> > > > public @interface MyQualifier {}
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > And then change your AdvancedFoo class to use the qualifier:
> > > >
> > > > @Dependent
> > > > @MyQualifier
> > > > public class AdvancedFoo extends SimpleFoo {
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > And accordingly, the init method which uses injection should
> > then look like
> > > > this:
> > > >
> > > > @Dependent
> > > > public class Parent extends Child {
> > > >
> > > > @Inject
> > > > @Override
> > > > protected void setFoo(@MyQualifier SimpleFoo foo) {
> > > > super.setFoo(foo);
> > > > }
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > Does this answer your question?
> > > >
> > > > Matej
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > >> From: "Alex Sviridov" < ooo_saturn7(a)mail.ru
> <mailto:ooo_saturn7@mail.ru>
> > <mailto:ooo_saturn7@mail.ru <mailto:ooo_saturn7@mail.ru>> >
> > > >> To: "weld-dev" < weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> <mailto:weld-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> > <mailto:weld-dev@lists.jboss.org <mailto:weld-dev@lists.jboss.org>> >
> > > >> Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2017 1:46:23 PM
> > > >> Subject: [weld-dev] How to make method injection when bean
> > subclass is
> > > >> required in Weld?
> > > >>
> > > >> Hi all,
> > > >>
> > > >> I am really sorry for writing to this mailing list, but I
> > checked all user
> > > >> forums and chats and saw that they are very old.
> > > >>
> > > >> I would be very thankful if someone gives suggestion for
> > solving the
> > > >> following problem.
> > > >> I have a child and parent class. Child has SimpleFoo, Parent
> > needs Advaced
> > > >> foo. So,
> > > >>
> > > >> @Dependent
> > > >> public class SimpleFoo {
> > > >> }
> > > >>
> > > >> @Dependent
> > > >> public class AdvancedFoo extends SimpleFoo {
> > > >> }
> > > >>
> > > >> @Dependent
> > > >> public class Child {
> > > >>
> > > >> private SimpleFoo foo;
> > > >>
> > > >> @Inject
> > > >> protected void setFoo(SimpleFoo foo) {
> > > >> this.foo = foo;
> > > >> }
> > > >> }
> > > >>
> > > >> @Dependent
> > > >> public class Parent extends Child {
> > > >>
> > > >> @Inject
> > > >> @Override
> > > >> protected void setFoo(SimpleFoo foo) { //How to inject here
> > AdvancedFoo?
> > > >> super.setFoo(foo);
> > > >> }
> > > >> }
> > > >>
> > > >> How to inject in Parent AdvancedFoo? I know that I can do it via
> > > >> constructor
> > > >> injection
> > > >> but I need method injection. How to do it? Can it be done
> > without using
> > > >> names
> > > >> (like MyBean1)
> > > >> but only using classes (AdvancedFoo)?
> > > >>
> > > >> Best regards, Alex
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> Alex Sviridov
> > > >>
> > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > >> weld-dev mailing list
> > > >> weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:weld-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> <mailto:weld-dev@lists.jboss.org <mailto:weld-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
> > > >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > weld-dev mailing list
> > > > weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:weld-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> <mailto:weld-dev@lists.jboss.org <mailto:weld-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
> > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Martin Kouba
> > > Senior Software Engineer
> > > Red Hat, Czech Republic
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > weld-dev mailing list
> > > weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:weld-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> <mailto:weld-dev@lists.jboss.org <mailto:weld-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
> > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > --
> > Alex Sviridov
>
> --
> Martin Kouba
> Senior Software Engineer
> Red Hat, Czech Republic
>
>
>
> --
> Alex Sviridov
--
Martin Kouba
Senior Software Engineer
Red Hat, Czech Republic
8 years, 4 months
Principal built-in bean
by Emily Jiang
A Java EE or embeddable EJB container must provide the following built-in
beans, all of which
have qualifier @Default:
a bean with bean type javax.security.Principal, allowing injection of a
Principal
representing the current caller identity.
The spec does not say the scope of this bean. In Weld, what is the scope
for the Principal bean?
--
Thanks
Emily
=================
Emily Jiang
ejiang(a)apache.org
8 years, 4 months
