Thank you Martin, Tomas and Matej for your
quick response!
Martin, it looks like the two issues
you mentioned might be the reason for the Interceptor wording changes.
As suggested by Tomas, we did a bit
experiments.
In the following code snippet
@Interceptors (Interceptor0.class)
public class MyBean{
public void myMethod(){
}
}
Interceptor binding: MyInterceptorBinding
public class Interceptor0 {
}
We verified the current Weld behaviour:
1. add @Interceptor, @Priority(1), @MyInterceptorBinding
to Interceptor0
The interceptor0 was invoked twice on
invoking myMethod - basically the @Interceptor annotation is not ignored.
2. add @Interceptor, @Priority(1)
to Interceptor0
The Interceptor0 was invoked once, which
means @Interceptor annotation is ignored, which corresponds to the issue
[1].
3. add @Interceptor, @MyInterceptorBinding
The interceptor0 was invoked once, which
means @Interceptor annotation is ignored, which corresponds to the issue
[2]
According to Interceptor updated sentence
("The Interceptor annotation is ignored on
interceptor classes bound
>> using the Interceptors annotation.")
, the spec wording seems to suggest to ignore the @Interceptor binding
completely for the above 3 scenarios, which means the Interceptor0 should
only be invoked once. Which do you think? This seems to be a behaviour
change. If this is the case, we need to suggest to the Interceptor spec
for more clarification.
[1] https://github.com/javaee/interceptors-spec/issues/27
[2] https://github.com/javaee/interceptors-spec/issues/23
Many thanks,
Emily
===========================
Emily Jiang
WebSphere Application Server, CDI & MicroProfile Development Lead
MP 211, DE3A20, Winchester, Hampshire, England, SO21 2JN
Phone: +44 (0)1962 816278 Internal: 246278
Email: emijiang@uk.ibm.com
Lotus Notes: Emily Jiang/UK/IBM@IBMGB
From:
Martin Kouba <mkouba@redhat.com>
To:
Emily Jiang <EMIJIANG@uk.ibm.com>,
weld-dev <weld-dev@lists.jboss.org>
Date:
01/06/2017 08:17
Subject:
Re: [weld-dev]
Interceptor & Interceptors
Tomas Remes pointed out that the new/upcoming version
contains the new
sentence which also mentions @Interceptor.
I think it's related to:
https://github.com/javaee/interceptors-spec/issues/27
But it's hard to guess as it's not possible to track the changes -
sources are binary files.
Martin
Dne 1.6.2017 v 08:07 Martin Kouba napsal(a):
> Hi Emily,
>
> I suppose you're talking about section 5.3 Ordering Interceptors using
> the Priority Annotation:
> "The Priority annotation is ignored on interceptors bound to
a component
> using the Interceptors annotation."
>
> There is a very old clarification issue for the interceptor spec:
> https://github.com/javaee/interceptors-spec/issues/23
> (originally INTERCEPTORS_SPEC-23)
>
> Martin
>
> Dne 31.5.2017 v 14:53 Emily Jiang napsal(a):
>> Hi Martin,
>>
>> In the updated Interceptor spec, it has the following statement:
>>
>> "The Interceptor annotation is ignored on interceptor classes
bound
>> using the Interceptorsannotation."
>>
>> I assume this already the case in Weld 2.x, CDI 1.2 implementation.
>> Right?
>>
>> Many thanks,
>> Emily
>> ===========================
>> Emily Jiang
>> WebSphere Application Server, CDI & MicroProfile Development
Lead
>>
>> MP 211, DE3A20, Winchester, Hampshire, England, SO21 2JN
>> Phone: +44 (0)1962 816278 Internal: 246278
>>
>> Email: emijiang@uk.ibm.com
>> Lotus Notes: Emily Jiang/UK/IBM@IBMGB
>>
>> Unless stated otherwise above:
>> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with
>> number 741598.
>> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire
PO6
>> 3AU
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> weld-dev mailing list
>> weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev
>>
>
--
Martin Kouba
Senior Software Engineer
Red Hat, Czech Republic
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6
3AU