[cdi-dev] [JBoss JIRA] (CDI-403) why decorator requires interface

[Mathieu Lachance (JIRA)]

     [ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-403?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Mathieu Lachance updated CDI-403:
---------------------------------

    Description: 
As discussed with Jozef Hartinger on the WELD forum thread (see forum reference and CDI-224),
would it be possible to revisit why decorator requires an interface ?

I do not understand the semantic difference between:
1. a decorator to be an abstract class which implements an interface, which delegate to the same interface. 
2. a decorator to be a concrete class which extends a another class, which delegates to the same class.

Why 1. should be allowed and why 2. should be disallowed ?

As stated in CDI-224, if there is no technical reason of disallowing 2., should it be then considerate as a vendor specific feature to support it whether or not ?

It is kind of sad that only decorators requires an interface while all the others Java EE 6 features do not.

Thanks,


  was:
As discussed with Jozef Hartinger on the WELD forum thread (see forum reference and CDI-224),
would it be possible to revisit why decorator requires an interface ?

I do not understand the semantic difference between:
1. a decorator to be an abstract class which implements an interface, which delegate to the same interface. 
2. a decorator to be a concrete class which extends a another class, which delegates to the same class.

Why 1. should be allowed and why 2. should be disallowed ?

As stated in CDI-224, if there is no technical reason of disallowing 2., should it be then considerate as a vendor specific feature to support it whether or not ?

Thanks,



    
> why decorator requires interface
> --------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CDI-403
>                 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-403
>             Project: CDI Specification Issues
>          Issue Type: Clarification
>            Reporter: Mathieu Lachance
>
> As discussed with Jozef Hartinger on the WELD forum thread (see forum reference and CDI-224),
> would it be possible to revisit why decorator requires an interface ?
> I do not understand the semantic difference between:
> 1. a decorator to be an abstract class which implements an interface, which delegate to the same interface. 
> 2. a decorator to be a concrete class which extends a another class, which delegates to the same class.
> Why 1. should be allowed and why 2. should be disallowed ?
> As stated in CDI-224, if there is no technical reason of disallowing 2., should it be then considerate as a vendor specific feature to support it whether or not ?
> It is kind of sad that only decorators requires an interface while all the others Java EE 6 features do not.
> Thanks,

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira