Re: [weld-dev] [jsr-299-eg] Updated spec with @BeanTypes and clarification of @New
Roberto Chinnici wrote:
Gavin King wrote:
>
> You have provided no argumentation in support of "should not".
>
> Whereas I have provided a Very Good Reason why they *should* be
> injectable, with limited semantics, using the special @New annotation.
>
OK, let me ask you a simpler question: if I have a web module, say,
without a beans.xml
descriptor, can I lookup a BeanManager in JNDI under
java:comp/BeanManager? Currently
the platform spec says you can't.
Are we all talking about the same thing? Earlier you mentioned use the
term "bean" instead of "class". Are you having an issue with the
terminology, or is it the capability you have a problem with?
To be clear, when you say @New blah, the resulting bean instance belongs
to the beanmanager associated with the injection point. The "first"
instance, if it even exists, is not touched in any way by 299. So all we
are talking about is a way to reference any class that fits the rules of
a 299 bean. In other words, anything which can be a 299 bean, has a
"new" instance implicitly created. The source of that bean is not really
important, other than it has to be visible to the classloader.
--
Jason T. Greene
JBoss, a division of Red Hat