[cdi-dev] Is the concept of mutable event payload specified

[Thorben Janssen]

We should be careful with making the payload imutable. I know of several
applications (and companies) that change the payload to send some
information back to to the event producer.
We shouldn't break these apps, if we can solve it in a different way.

--
*Thorben Janssen*

@thjanssen123 <https://twitter.com/thjanssen123>
www.thoughts-on-java.org

2014-12-16 18:46 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau at gmail.com>:
>
> Hi Antoine,
>
> why isn't it portable?
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau
> http://www.tomitribe.com
> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-12-16 18:39 GMT+01:00 Pete Muir <pmuir at redhat.com>:
> > I don’t think it’s specified. As objects are, by default in Java,
> mutable, I
> > would assume that payloads are implicitly mutable.
> >
> > On 16 Dec 2014, at 16:31, Antoine Sabot-Durand <antoine at sabot-durand.net
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > Hi guys,
> >
> >
> > Always working on Async event concept and discussion around mutable
> > payloads. I was looking where in the spec we specified the fact that
> fired
> > payload are mutable. I red-read chapter 10
> > (http://docs.jboss.org/cdi/spec/1.2/cdi-spec.html#events) twice and
> didn’t
> > found. I also browsed JIRA and TCK to find any ref to this feature and
> found
> > nothing. On the other hand it is not specified that payload should be
> > immutable ;)
> >
> > I’d be happy if some of you could have a look and see if I missed
> something.
> >
> > If I’m not wrong, the mutable payload we (including myself) advertise in
> CDI
> > is a non portable feature (I’m the firs surprised here). So I propose
> that :
> >
> > 1) We decide to write something in the specification about allowing or
> > forbidding it (I know some people not happy with this mix between
> observer
> > and visitor pattern)
> > 1bis) Should we decide to forbid it by default, we should provide an
> > alternative mode to allow people using this unspecified feature
> > 2) Forbid it for fireAsync()
> >
> >
> > Thanks for your feedback and your correction if I missed the feature in
> the
> > spec.
> >
> > Antoine
> > _______________________________________________
> > cdi-dev mailing list
> > cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> >
> > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> code
> > under the Apache License, Version 2
> > (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> > provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> intellectual
> > property rights inherent in such information.
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cdi-dev mailing list
> > cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
> >
> > Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> code
> > under the Apache License, Version 2
> > (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> > provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> intellectual
> > property rights inherent in such information.
>
> _______________________________________________
> cdi-dev mailing list
> cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
>
> Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the
> code under the Apache License, Version 2 (
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas
> provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other
> intellectual property rights inherent in such information.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20141216/f74fbdb4/attachment-0001.html