[weld-dev] TCK Interceptors Classes

[Gavin King]

Hrm section 2.6 of the common annotations spec seems to confirm your
interpretation. What's very problematic here is that the interceptors
spec uses a different terminology to talk about the callbacks that it
is defining. Which leads to my interpretation that it is defining a
different, distinct set of callbacks.

On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 3:08 PM, Marius Bogoevici <mariusb at redhat.com> wrote:
> Gavin,
>
> This is very ambiguous, as the 1.1 version of the Interceptors specification
> states very clearly the signature rules for defining lifecycle interceptor
> methods on interceptor classes and target classes.
>
> Also, this could mean that an interceptor class can specify two different
> @PostConstruct or @PreDestroy methods, which would refer to different
> targets (the intercepted instance/the interceptor itself), but the
> specification says very clearly:
> "At most one method of a given interceptor class can be designated as an
> around-invoke method, an around-timeout method, a post-construct method, or
> pre-destroy method."
>
> Also, it is not very clear to me what would be the benefit of a separate
> @PostConstruct/@PreDestroy method for the interceptor itself, as interceptor
> lifecycles are virtually the same as for the target objects.
>
> Marius
>
>
>
> Gavin King wrote:
>
> Check section 5.2.5 of the EE spec. It appears to confirm my
> understanding of this stuff.
>
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 2:33 PM, Gavin King <gavin.king at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> At least, that's my understanding of how interceptors are treated in
> EE6. You would have to check with Roberto and Ken for an absolutely
> definitive answer.
>
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Gavin King <gavin.king at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Right, but the interceptor itself has a lifecycle. It's a kind of
> managed bean. So it can have the callbacks that all managed beans can
> have.
>
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 2:17 PM, Gurkan Erdogdu <gurkanerdogdu at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> There are two differents scenario for lifecycle callbacks in interceptors
> specification
>
> 1* Used in interceptor class with InvocationContext parameter
>      @PreDestroy
>      public void blabla(InvocationContext){}
> 2* Used in bean class without any parameter
>      @PreDestroy
>      public void blabla(){}
>
> In TCK, @PreDestroy is used in interceptor class. So it may take
> InvocationContext.
>
> --Gurkan
>
> ________________________________
> From: Gavin King <gavin.king at gmail.com>
> To: Gurkan Erdogdu <gurkanerdogdu at yahoo.com>
> Cc: weld-dev at lists.jboss.org
> Sent: Mon, November 30, 2009 9:10:17 PM
> Subject: Re: [weld-dev] TCK Interceptors Classes
>
> Hrm, I think there are two kinds of @PreDestroy methods for an interceptor:
>
> @PreDestroy void foo(InvocationContext) { .. }  -> the intercepted
> bean is being destroyed
> @PreDestroy void foo() { .. }  -> the interceptor itself is being destroyed
>
> Right?
>
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 1:34 PM, Gurkan Erdogdu <gurkanerdogdu at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> Hi;
>
> Some interceptors classes in the TCK test suites implement @PreDestroy
> methods. AFAIK, interceptors specification says that methods with
> @PreDestroy in interceptor class must take InvocationContext parameter.
> But
> in TCK, those methods do not take InvocationContext parameter
>
> For example:
>
> org.jboss.jsr299.tck.tests.context.dependent.TransactionalInterceptor
>
> @PreDestroy public void destroy()
>    {
>       destroyed = true;
>    }
>
> Is it correct?
>
> --Gurkan
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> weld-dev mailing list
> weld-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev
>
>
>
> --
> Gavin King
> gavin.king at gmail.com
> http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
> http://hibernate.org
> http://seamframework.org
>
>
>
>
> --
> Gavin King
> gavin.king at gmail.com
> http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
> http://hibernate.org
> http://seamframework.org
>
>
>
> --
> Gavin King
> gavin.king at gmail.com
> http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
> http://hibernate.org
> http://seamframework.org
>
>
>
>
>



-- 
Gavin King
gavin.king at gmail.com
http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
http://hibernate.org
http://seamframework.org