[weld-dev] Generic Decorator

[Marius Bogoevici]

Pete Muir wrote:
> This looks like an out of date check...
>
>   
OK, thanks. Actually, I just noticed that the example in the 
introduction of the specification is showing exactly this use case.

I would, however, like to clarify whether the following use case is 
acceptable (was driven to this while handling @Inject GenericBean<T>):

class Receiver
{
    @Inject Injected<String> injected;
}

@Dependent
class Injected<T>
{
    public void Injected() {} // making clear that this satisfies the 
conditions for a generic managed bean
}

class StringInjectedProducer
{
    @Produces Injected<String> produce() { ... }
}

Looking carefully, it shouldn't, since Receiver.injected has ambiguous 
dependencies (on one hand Injected per se, on the other hand, the 
producer method). A qualifier can help disambiguating between the two 
situations.

If the statement above is correct, then ProducerFieldDefinitionTest in 
the TCK could be adjusted, since FunnelWeaver and pals 
(FunnelWeaverSpiderProducer and FunnelWeaverSpiderConsumer) illustrate 
exactly this behaviour (simple qualification will solve the ambiguity).

Marius