You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openwebbeans.apache.org by Gurkan Erdogdu <gu...@yahoo.com> on 2009/10/28 08:12:03 UTC
Re: Fw: [weld-dev] Using Interceptor/Decorator On Dependent Scoped Beans
Maybe using bytecode injection does the trick :)
________________________________
From: Joseph Bergmark <be...@gmail.com>
To: openwebbeans-dev@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Tue, October 27, 2009 10:33:01 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: [weld-dev] Using Interceptor/Decorator On Dependent Scoped Beans
Perhaps I am misunderstanding, but if you use a subclass to implement
interceptors/decorators doesn't that stop you from doing so on classes that
are final? I know there is a proxy restriction on final classes, but not
aware of a restriction on decorators/interceptors.
Sincerely,
Joe Bergmark
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Gurkan Erdogdu <gu...@yahoo.com>wrote:
>
> FYI.
>
>
>
> ----- Forwarded Message ----
> From: Gavin King <ga...@gmail.com>
> To: Gurkan Erdogdu <gu...@yahoo.com>
> Cc: weld-dev@lists.jboss.org; openwebbeans-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Tue, October 27, 2009 8:49:53 PM
> Subject: Re: [weld-dev] Using Interceptor/Decorator On Dependent Scoped
> Beans
>
> Yes, this is required and useful.
>
> However, interceptors/decorators are not really intended to be applied
> via the "client proxy" that the spec talks about. In fact, the spec is
> written to allow the interception to be implemented without any
> separate proxy object at all (using a subclass).
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Gurkan Erdogdu <gu...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi;
> >
> >
> > Does the 299 specification indicate that interceptors and decorators
> should
> > not be called for dependent scoped beans?
> >
> > Currently we do not implement Interceptor/Decorator on @Dependent scoped
> > beans in OWB because we do all interceptor/decorator stuff using proxy
> and
> > @Dependent scoped beans do not require client proxy.
> >
> > Does anyone has a good use case/example when dependent scoped beans are
> > useful or necessary?
> >
> > Thanks;
> >
> > --Gurkan
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > weld-dev mailing list
> > weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Gavin King
> gavin.king@gmail.com
> http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
> http://hibernate.org
> http://seamframework.org
>
>
>
>
Re: Fw: [weld-dev] Using Interceptor/Decorator On Dependent Scoped Beans
Posted by Gurkan Erdogdu <gu...@yahoo.com>.
Hi;
Decorators and Interceptors are not applied to Decorators/Interceptors managed beans.
--Gurkan
________________________________
From: Sven Linstaedt <sv...@googlemail.com>
To: openwebbeans-dev@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Wed, October 28, 2009 11:06:13 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: [weld-dev] Using Interceptor/Decorator On Dependent Scoped Beans
From 8.1.2:
If a decorator applies to a managed bean, and the bean class is declared
final, the container automatically detects the problem and treats it as a
deployment problem, as defined in Section 12.4, “Problems detected
automatically by the container”.
I have not found something similar in the interceptor chapter, but regarding
the point interceptors and decorators can be handled technically in a
similar way, I believe this restriction also applies to interceptors.
br, Sven
2009/10/28 Gurkan Erdogdu <gu...@yahoo.com>
> Maybe using bytecode injection does the trick :)
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Joseph Bergmark <be...@gmail.com>
> To: openwebbeans-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Tue, October 27, 2009 10:33:01 PM
> Subject: Re: Fw: [weld-dev] Using Interceptor/Decorator On Dependent Scoped
> Beans
>
> Perhaps I am misunderstanding, but if you use a subclass to implement
> interceptors/decorators doesn't that stop you from doing so on classes that
> are final? I know there is a proxy restriction on final classes, but not
> aware of a restriction on decorators/interceptors.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Joe Bergmark
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Gurkan Erdogdu <gurkanerdogdu@yahoo.com
> >wrote:
>
> >
> > FYI.
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Forwarded Message ----
> > From: Gavin King <ga...@gmail.com>
> > To: Gurkan Erdogdu <gu...@yahoo.com>
> > Cc: weld-dev@lists.jboss.org; openwebbeans-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Sent: Tue, October 27, 2009 8:49:53 PM
> > Subject: Re: [weld-dev] Using Interceptor/Decorator On Dependent Scoped
> > Beans
> >
> > Yes, this is required and useful.
> >
> > However, interceptors/decorators are not really intended to be applied
> > via the "client proxy" that the spec talks about. In fact, the spec is
> > written to allow the interception to be implemented without any
> > separate proxy object at all (using a subclass).
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Gurkan Erdogdu <gurkanerdogdu@yahoo.com
> >
> > wrote:
> > > Hi;
> > >
> > >
> > > Does the 299 specification indicate that interceptors and decorators
> > should
> > > not be called for dependent scoped beans?
> > >
> > > Currently we do not implement Interceptor/Decorator on @Dependent
> scoped
> > > beans in OWB because we do all interceptor/decorator stuff using proxy
> > and
> > > @Dependent scoped beans do not require client proxy.
> > >
> > > Does anyone has a good use case/example when dependent scoped beans are
> > > useful or necessary?
> > >
> > > Thanks;
> > >
> > > --Gurkan
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > weld-dev mailing list
> > > weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
> > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Gavin King
> > gavin.king@gmail.com
> > http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
> > http://hibernate.org
> > http://seamframework.org
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Fw: [weld-dev] Using Interceptor/Decorator On Dependent Scoped
Beans
Posted by Joseph Bergmark <be...@gmail.com>.
Thanks Sven, this was the section I missed!
Sincerely,
Joe Bergmark
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 5:06 AM, Sven Linstaedt <
sven.linstaedt@googlemail.com> wrote:
> From 8.1.2:
>
> If a decorator applies to a managed bean, and the bean class is declared
> final, the container automatically detects the problem and treats it as a
> deployment problem, as defined in Section 12.4, “Problems detected
> automatically by the container”.
>
> I have not found something similar in the interceptor chapter, but
> regarding
> the point interceptors and decorators can be handled technically in a
> similar way, I believe this restriction also applies to interceptors.
>
> br, Sven
>
>
>
> 2009/10/28 Gurkan Erdogdu <gu...@yahoo.com>
>
> > Maybe using bytecode injection does the trick :)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Joseph Bergmark <be...@gmail.com>
> > To: openwebbeans-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Sent: Tue, October 27, 2009 10:33:01 PM
> > Subject: Re: Fw: [weld-dev] Using Interceptor/Decorator On Dependent
> Scoped
> > Beans
> >
> > Perhaps I am misunderstanding, but if you use a subclass to implement
> > interceptors/decorators doesn't that stop you from doing so on classes
> that
> > are final? I know there is a proxy restriction on final classes, but not
> > aware of a restriction on decorators/interceptors.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Joe Bergmark
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Gurkan Erdogdu <gurkanerdogdu@yahoo.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > FYI.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Forwarded Message ----
> > > From: Gavin King <ga...@gmail.com>
> > > To: Gurkan Erdogdu <gu...@yahoo.com>
> > > Cc: weld-dev@lists.jboss.org; openwebbeans-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > Sent: Tue, October 27, 2009 8:49:53 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [weld-dev] Using Interceptor/Decorator On Dependent Scoped
> > > Beans
> > >
> > > Yes, this is required and useful.
> > >
> > > However, interceptors/decorators are not really intended to be applied
> > > via the "client proxy" that the spec talks about. In fact, the spec is
> > > written to allow the interception to be implemented without any
> > > separate proxy object at all (using a subclass).
> > >
> > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Gurkan Erdogdu <
> gurkanerdogdu@yahoo.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > > Hi;
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Does the 299 specification indicate that interceptors and decorators
> > > should
> > > > not be called for dependent scoped beans?
> > > >
> > > > Currently we do not implement Interceptor/Decorator on @Dependent
> > scoped
> > > > beans in OWB because we do all interceptor/decorator stuff using
> proxy
> > > and
> > > > @Dependent scoped beans do not require client proxy.
> > > >
> > > > Does anyone has a good use case/example when dependent scoped beans
> are
> > > > useful or necessary?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks;
> > > >
> > > > --Gurkan
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > weld-dev mailing list
> > > > weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
> > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Gavin King
> > > gavin.king@gmail.com
> > > http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
> > > http://hibernate.org
> > > http://seamframework.org
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
Re: Fw: [weld-dev] Using Interceptor/Decorator On Dependent Scoped
Beans
Posted by Sven Linstaedt <sv...@googlemail.com>.
>From 8.1.2:
If a decorator applies to a managed bean, and the bean class is declared
final, the container automatically detects the problem and treats it as a
deployment problem, as defined in Section 12.4, “Problems detected
automatically by the container”.
I have not found something similar in the interceptor chapter, but regarding
the point interceptors and decorators can be handled technically in a
similar way, I believe this restriction also applies to interceptors.
br, Sven
2009/10/28 Gurkan Erdogdu <gu...@yahoo.com>
> Maybe using bytecode injection does the trick :)
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Joseph Bergmark <be...@gmail.com>
> To: openwebbeans-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Tue, October 27, 2009 10:33:01 PM
> Subject: Re: Fw: [weld-dev] Using Interceptor/Decorator On Dependent Scoped
> Beans
>
> Perhaps I am misunderstanding, but if you use a subclass to implement
> interceptors/decorators doesn't that stop you from doing so on classes that
> are final? I know there is a proxy restriction on final classes, but not
> aware of a restriction on decorators/interceptors.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Joe Bergmark
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Gurkan Erdogdu <gurkanerdogdu@yahoo.com
> >wrote:
>
> >
> > FYI.
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Forwarded Message ----
> > From: Gavin King <ga...@gmail.com>
> > To: Gurkan Erdogdu <gu...@yahoo.com>
> > Cc: weld-dev@lists.jboss.org; openwebbeans-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Sent: Tue, October 27, 2009 8:49:53 PM
> > Subject: Re: [weld-dev] Using Interceptor/Decorator On Dependent Scoped
> > Beans
> >
> > Yes, this is required and useful.
> >
> > However, interceptors/decorators are not really intended to be applied
> > via the "client proxy" that the spec talks about. In fact, the spec is
> > written to allow the interception to be implemented without any
> > separate proxy object at all (using a subclass).
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Gurkan Erdogdu <gurkanerdogdu@yahoo.com
> >
> > wrote:
> > > Hi;
> > >
> > >
> > > Does the 299 specification indicate that interceptors and decorators
> > should
> > > not be called for dependent scoped beans?
> > >
> > > Currently we do not implement Interceptor/Decorator on @Dependent
> scoped
> > > beans in OWB because we do all interceptor/decorator stuff using proxy
> > and
> > > @Dependent scoped beans do not require client proxy.
> > >
> > > Does anyone has a good use case/example when dependent scoped beans are
> > > useful or necessary?
> > >
> > > Thanks;
> > >
> > > --Gurkan
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > weld-dev mailing list
> > > weld-dev@lists.jboss.org
> > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Gavin King
> > gavin.king@gmail.com
> > http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
> > http://hibernate.org
> > http://seamframework.org
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>