[cdi-dev] RequestScoped and Injection Points

John D. Ament john.d.ament at gmail.com
Thu Sep 8 11:40:04 EDT 2011

Pete, Mark,

So I get there is no single injection point, however it should be the case
that every injection point is declared the same way, no?  E.g. they're the
"same" in the sense that the line of code is the same, but different in that
they exist in different areas.


On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 8:38 AM, Pete Muir <pmuir at redhat.com> wrote:

> For a request scoped bean there is not a single injection point, like there
> is for dependent beans. Say I have a request scoped bean, Bean A.
> I have two other beans, of any scope, Bean B and Bean C.
> If both beans B and C inject A in the same request, then the injection
> point for A is both Bean B and Bean C.
> Furthermore, client proxies mean that bean A is instantiated lazily, to
> solve the circular injection problem, and so has no knowledge of it's
> injection point when actually created.
> On 7 Sep 2011, at 01:10, John D. Ament wrote:
> > CDI Experts
> >
> > Was wondering if you could help me understand rationale.  In request
> scoped objects, when you create a producer method that creates request
> scoped instances, why is there no access to the underlying injection point?
> >
> > Let's say that you have a qualifier with a single String value attribute
> that is nonbinding; let's say @JmsDestination.  You have the following
> injection points:
> >
> > @Inject @JmsDestination("jms/MyQueue") MessageProducer queueProducer;
> > @Inject @JmsDestination("jms/MyTopic") MessageProducer topicProducer;
> >
> > In this case, two distinct MessageProducers should be injected.  The CDI
> container should be able to differentiate the two, since they have different
> values on the qualifier.  However, CDI disallows this since the producer
> methods used to create them would not have access to the injection point.
>  If a second injection point is found, CDI should return the same instance.
> >
> > I hope it doesn't sound like I'm babbling, but I wanted to put the
> question out there to see if it's something that could be addressed.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > John
> > _______________________________________________
> > cdi-dev mailing list
> > cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20110908/5258618b/attachment.html 

More information about the cdi-dev mailing list