Re: [weld-dev] spec question on 3.5 Resource Beans
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 6:01 PM, Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de> wrote:
In case of injecting @PersistenceContext, adding @Produces and a
Qualifier imho simply makes them a
producer field, so I don't understand why there is any need for a special
'resource bean' in this case.
Because this behavior must be welldefined. You think you can just
combine two annotations from different specs on a single field and
"hope" for the behavior you like? Really? You really expect that
something like that is going to work in WebSphere?
I also do not understand the restriction for disallowing @Named. Of
course @Named in the EL sense
doesn't make much sense for _any_ @Dependent scoped bean, but @Named is a perfectly
valid
qualifier also! So it would be perfectly valid to write
private @Inject @Named("specialEm") EntityManager em;
Accessing a resource using EL is a really bad idea.
So is using @Named as a qualifier.
It would also be perfectly possible to provide a EntityManager via a
producer method btw, isn't?
Of course.
Is there any reason why we cannot simply say that injecting EE
resources must be provided
in an EE container? Then all your neat tricks should simply just work?
"simply just work"? What, if we *pray* hard enough?
Are you out of your mind?
Have you noticed that there is a rather large blue vendor with many
strange ideas that is also expected to implement this stuff?
--
Gavin King
gavin.king(a)gmail.com
http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
http://hibernate.org
http://seamframework.org