[cdi-dev] Managing Dependent Scoped Beans

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

I see, thks.

I dont like having 2 methods with the same semantic there but agree the
default is misleading for such cases.

1. Cant we change the default? looks like current one can break apps if
misunderstood and not sure changing it is worse.

If not

2. Maybe we can type the returned type with a release method in the
instance  wrapper instead of enriching Instance API making it contextual by
nature?: w=instance...get();w.getValue().work();w.release(/*no param*/);

That is what most framework did finally to integrate with CDI so looks
natural.
Le 16 mai 2016 10:23, "Martin Kouba" <mkouba at redhat.com> a écrit :

> Dne 16.5.2016 v 10:20 Romain Manni-Bucau napsal(a):
>
>>
>> Le 16 mai 2016 10:01, "Martin Kouba" <mkouba at redhat.com
>> <mailto:mkouba at redhat.com>> a écrit :
>>  >
>>  > Dne 15.5.2016 v 16:14 John D. Ament napsal(a):
>>  > > Hey guys
>>  > >
>>  > > Seems like we have some issues in JIRA all focused on managing the
>>  > > lifecycle of Dependent scoped beans.  It also seems like we have many
>>  > > differing opinions about how to manage them.
>>  > >
>>  > > - Martin raised a PR to add a release() method to Instance to help
>>  > > destroy a dependent bean https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi/pull/286
>>  > > - I raised a PR https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi/pull/289 to update
>> the
>>  > > spec to clarify how to manage a dependent scoped bean.
>>  > >
>>  > > Right now, it seems that the big disagreement is whether
>>  > > Instance.destroy() can destroy objects not created by it (the case
>> being
>>  > > around the CDI utility class, being an impl of Instance).  I'm
>> currently
>>  > > heavily against Martin's proposed changes, but want to get input from
>>  > > others on the group to understand their perspective.
>>  > >
>>  > > - Does the spec require destroy() to be called only on instances
>> that it
>>  > > created?  When I read 5.6.1 the only requirement I see is that it
>> has to
>>  > > be a dependent scoped bean.  Note when I ask this I'm asking from the
>>  > > spec perspective, its a different problem if there's some issues with
>>  > > implementations following suite (I would imagine there needs to be
>> some
>>  > > shared global registry of dependent scoped beans for this to work).
>>  > >
>>  > > - Do we want two methods that effectively do the same thing?  I don't
>>  > > see a strong difference between the two.
>>  >
>>  > Instance.destroy() currently always destroys the contextual instance.
>>  > Which is not always what users expect. That's why I proposed to add
>>  > Instance.release() - https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi/pull/286,
>>  > previously Instance.getBean() -
>> https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi/pull/273.
>>  >
>>
>> Since you give the instance to both I guess the intention from user
>> point of view is obvious and then we dont need 2 methods. What would be
>> the other use case?
>>
>
> https://github.com/cdi-spec/cdi/pull/273#issuecomment-179080614
>
>
>>  > >
>>  > > On the flipside, my change is more a spec clarification.  I'm
>> thinking
>>  > > more now that it belongs as a reword of 5.6.1 to clarify how to use
>>  > > destroy() on dependent beans, rather than where I put it.  I think
>>  > > realistically we have all of the tools needed to manage the
>> lifecycle of
>>  > > these classes, just need to clarify them for people to use.
>>  > >
>>  > > John
>>  > >
>>  > >
>>  > > _______________________________________________
>>  > > cdi-dev mailing list
>>  > > cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto: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.
>>  > >
>>  >
>>  > --
>>  > Martin Kouba
>>  > Software Engineer
>>  > Red Hat, Czech Republic
>>  > _______________________________________________
>>  > cdi-dev mailing list
>>  > cdi-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto: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.
>>
>>
> --
> Martin Kouba
> Software Engineer
> Red Hat, Czech Republic
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/attachments/20160516/f6f74ca7/attachment.html