[cdi-dev] [JBoss JIRA] (CDI-721) configureAnnotatedType vs setAnnotatedType restrition is unecessarily strict

[Martin Kouba (JIRA)]

    [ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-721?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13525768#comment-13525768 ] 

Martin Kouba commented on CDI-721:
----------------------------------

bq. "observer invocation" is highly ambiguous. It might be interpreted as "ObserverMethod invocation" but also as "em.fire()"
[~struberg] I don't think so. "observer invocation" != "event.fire()", that would be "observer notification", at least from the spec POV - see also 10.5. Observer notification.

I insist that this is a backward incompatible change.


> configureAnnotatedType vs setAnnotatedType restrition is unecessarily strict
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CDI-721
>                 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-721
>             Project: CDI Specification Issues
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Portable Extensions
>    Affects Versions: 2.0 .Final
>            Reporter: Mark Struberg
>
> {noformat}
> Any observer of this event is permitted to wrap and/or replace the AnnotatedType by calling either setAnnotatedType() or configureAnnotatedType(). If both methods are called within an observer notification an IllegalStateException is thrown.
> {noformat}
> This rule is way too strict without any real reason.
> Any CDI container must support that both methods are being called on the same event payload anyway. Because we did not forbid that observerMethod1 invokes setAnnotatedType and observerMethod2 uses configureAnnoatedType. And that's good that way, otherwise the pluggability would be lost.
> We should delete this sentence without any substitution.
> The same applies to similar configurator methods like configureBeanAttributes, etc.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.5.0#75005)