Re: [webbeans-dev] Is @Named qualifier?
We (Gavin for Red Hat) disputed that @Named should be a spec provided
qualifier, due to it promoting poor coding practices, however we were
over ruled.
Reusing it for defining the EL name does make sense semantically to
me. In general qualifiers are used in resolution, in the "by name"
case, we have a special qualifier. Whilst CDI and atinject don't
expose anything to JNDI, you could easily write an extension that used
@Named for this purpose.
On 4 Sep 2009, at 19:29, Dan Allen wrote:
And there lies the problem of trying to use these as common
annotations. At this point I defer to Gavin because clearly it must
be clarified in the spec. 299 doesn't deal with exposing a bean to
JNDI unless I am overlooking something.
- Dan Allen
Sent from my Android-powered G1 phone:
An open platform for carriers, developers
and consumers.
> On Sep 4, 2009 2:20 PM, "Mark Struberg" <struberg(a)yahoo.de> wrote:
>
> But in JSR-330 the @Named has nothing to do with EL! It's really a
> qualifier like e.g. a JNDI name or a named Spring bean!
> LieGrue, strub --- On Fri, 9/4/09, Dan Allen
> <dan.j.allen(a)gmail.com> wrote: > From: Dan Allen <da...
>
> > Cc: webbeans-dev(a)lists.jboss.org, "Takeshi Kondo"
<takeshi.kondo(a)gmail.com
> >
> > Date: Friday, September 4, 2009, 8:14 PM
> > My question was retorical. I don't > get how it is a qualifier.
> It violates the whole type-safety ...
>
_______________________________________________
webbeans-dev mailing list
webbeans-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/webbeans-dev