Re: [weld-dev] javax.el.ExpressionFactory has final methods! CDI doesn't allow that

Dne 21.10.2015 v 13:20 Emily Jiang napsal(a): > Thanks Martin! > The new final method on the Hashtable is > > final boolean initHashSeedAsNeeded(int capacity) > I see. This package-private method was added in JDK7. > The change went as part of the following bug fix: > > [1] http://bugs.java.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=8006593 > > As for the OWB-616 jira, I did not look at the actual fix, but I assume > the fix by the following comments. I might be wrong here. > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-616#> > Mark Struberg > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=struberg> > added a comment - 01/Oct/11 19:12 > > I now changed the checks to allow private final and public/protected > static final methods. > Mark does not talk about non-static package-private methods, right? He talks about private final and public/protected static final => should work in Weld too. If non-static package-private methods are allowed than the spec is violated. Unfortunately, it seems there's no tck test for this. > > Thanks > > Emily > > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Martin Kouba <mkouba(a)redhat.com > <mailto:mkouba@redhat.com>> wrote: > > Hi Emily, > > commments inline. > > Dne 21.10.2015 v 11:02 Emily Jiang napsal(a): > > CDI specification does not allow proxying a class with > non-private final > methods. The java.util.Hashtable class has a > non-private final method added to the class in later versions > of Java, so a CDI application that previously worked may break > when updating the Java level. > > > Just for the record: what's the name of the method? > > > This issue was logged in CDI-527. > > OpenWebBeans fixed this via the jira > (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-616). > > > OWB-616 does not fix CDI-527 but CDI-159, i.e. a private final > method does not cause a deployment problem. This works in Weld too. > On the other hand, CDI-527 is still an open issue so we can't simply > fix it. In theory, we could add a new feature of a non-portable > mode. But non-portable mode is not intended to be commonly used. > It's kind of a workaround. > > > Can Weld fix this in the 2.3 or 2.2 trunk? > > > -- > Thanks > Emily > ================= > Emily Jiang > ejiang(a)apache.org <mailto:ejiang@apache.org> > <mailto:ejiang@apache.org <mailto:ejiang@apache.org>> > > > _______________________________________________ > weld-dev mailing list > weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:weld-dev@lists.jboss.org> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev > > > -- > Martin Kouba > Software Engineer > Red Hat, Czech Republic > > > > > -- > Thanks > Emily > ================= > Emily Jiang > ejiang(a)apache.org <mailto:ejiang@apache.org> > -- Martin Kouba Software Engineer Red Hat, Czech Republic