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): -- Martin Kouba Senior Software Engineer Red Hat, Czech Republic

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 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(a)uk.ibm.com Lotus Notes: Emily Jiang/UK/IBM@IBMGB From: Martin Kouba <mkouba(a)redhat.com&gt; To: Emily Jiang <EMIJIANG(a)uk.ibm.com&gt;, weld-dev <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org&gt; 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): -- 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

Yes it's still not very clear to me why this limitation has been introduced but maybe I just don't understand it correctly. Therefore I created https://github.com/javaee/interceptors-spec/issues/33 Tom ----- Original Message ----- From: "Emily Jiang" <EMIJIANG(a)uk.ibm.com&gt; To: "Martin Kouba" <mkouba(a)redhat.com&gt; Cc: "weld-dev" <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org&gt; Sent: Thursday, June 1, 2017 11:26:44 AM Subject: Re: [weld-dev] Interceptor & Interceptors 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 [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(a)uk.ibm.com Lotus Notes: Emily Jiang/UK/IBM@IBMGB From: Martin Kouba <mkouba(a)redhat.com&gt; To: Emily Jiang <EMIJIANG(a)uk.ibm.com&gt;, weld-dev <weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org&gt; 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): -- 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 _______________________________________________ weld-dev mailing list weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev