You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to commits@tomee.apache.org by "Jacek Laskowski (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2007/12/27 15:37:43 UTC
[jira] Work started: (OPENEJB-583) Problems excluding default
interceptor
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-583?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Work on OPENEJB-583 started by Jacek Laskowski.
> Problems excluding default interceptor
> --------------------------------------
>
> Key: OPENEJB-583
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-583
> Project: OpenEJB
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: interceptors
> Affects Versions: 3.0-beta-1
> Reporter: Prasad Kashyap
> Assignee: Jacek Laskowski
> Fix For: 3.0-beta-2
>
>
> http://www.nabble.com/forum/ViewPost.jtp?post=10271166&framed=y&skin=2756
> This problem exists uniformly for both annotation specified and DD specificied interceptors
> If you try to exclude a class from default interceptors, the lifecycle events are excluded but some of the business methods are not.
> When a @ExcludeDefault is specified at the class level, default interceptors are excluded only for those business methods that do not have a @ExcludeClass specified on them.
> If a business method has a @ExcludeClass specified on it, it ignores the @ExcludeDefault specified for the whole class (either by annotation or xml).
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
Re: (OPENEJB-583) Problems excluding default interceptor
Posted by David Blevins <da...@visi.com>.
And have fun skiing!
-David
On Dec 28, 2007, at 12:16 PM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
> On Dec 28, 2007 8:12 PM, David Blevins <da...@visi.com> wrote:
>> FYI, this test case is going to be invaluable to you:
>> org.apache.openejb.core.stateless.StatelessInterceptorTest
>>
>> I wrote that up before we had the corresponding itests. It was
>> invaluable to me when writing the original binding processing code.
>> It doesn't have the situation described in OPENEJB-583, but it could
>> be added so you'd have a small isolated unit test to walk through
>> with
>> a debugger.
>
> Thanks Dave for the hint, but I need to stop working on it as I'm
> heading to the Polish mountains practicing my skying (in)abilities and
> will be offline until 01/03. If you happen to release beta-2 in the
> meantime, just reassign it to beta-3. Have fun!
>
> Jacek
>
> --
> Jacek Laskowski
> http://www.JacekLaskowski.pl
>
Re: (OPENEJB-583) Problems excluding default interceptor
Posted by David Blevins <da...@visi.com>.
On Dec 28, 2007, at 12:30 PM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
> On Dec 28, 2007 9:24 PM, David Blevins <da...@visi.com> wrote:
>
>> Do you mind if I fix it real quick then? I think it's just a couple
>> line change.
>
> Nope. Go and smash the bug so it won't see the light anymore ;-) If
> you happen to write a unit test for it, it'd be even better. I enjoyed
> reading the techniques with the annotated static classes very much and
> would appreciate some more.
Done. Added more to the StatelessInterceptorTest.
FYI, had to yank this part of your last change:
private boolean implies(Method method, String ejbName, Level
level, InterceptorBindingInfo info) {
// do we have parameters?
List<String> params = methodInfo.methodParams;
- if (params == null) return true;
+ if (params == null || params.size() == 0) return true;
If the params are explicitly set as so:
<method>
<method-name>echo</method-name>
<method-params></method-params>
</method>
That maps directly an echo() method and wouldn't apply to an
overloaded method such as echo(String).
-David
Re: (OPENEJB-583) Problems excluding default interceptor
Posted by Jacek Laskowski <ja...@laskowski.net.pl>.
On Dec 28, 2007 9:24 PM, David Blevins <da...@visi.com> wrote:
> Do you mind if I fix it real quick then? I think it's just a couple
> line change.
Nope. Go and smash the bug so it won't see the light anymore ;-) If
you happen to write a unit test for it, it'd be even better. I enjoyed
reading the techniques with the annotated static classes very much and
would appreciate some more.
Jacek
--
Jacek Laskowski
http://www.JacekLaskowski.pl
Re: (OPENEJB-583) Problems excluding default interceptor
Posted by David Blevins <da...@visi.com>.
On Dec 28, 2007, at 12:16 PM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
> On Dec 28, 2007 8:12 PM, David Blevins <da...@visi.com> wrote:
>> FYI, this test case is going to be invaluable to you:
>> org.apache.openejb.core.stateless.StatelessInterceptorTest
>>
>> I wrote that up before we had the corresponding itests. It was
>> invaluable to me when writing the original binding processing code.
>> It doesn't have the situation described in OPENEJB-583, but it could
>> be added so you'd have a small isolated unit test to walk through
>> with
>> a debugger.
>
> Thanks Dave for the hint, but I need to stop working on it as I'm
> heading to the Polish mountains practicing my skying (in)abilities and
> will be offline until 01/03. If you happen to release beta-2 in the
> meantime, just reassign it to beta-3. Have fun!
Do you mind if I fix it real quick then? I think it's just a couple
line change.
-David
Re: (OPENEJB-583) Problems excluding default interceptor
Posted by Jacek Laskowski <ja...@laskowski.net.pl>.
On Dec 28, 2007 8:12 PM, David Blevins <da...@visi.com> wrote:
> FYI, this test case is going to be invaluable to you:
> org.apache.openejb.core.stateless.StatelessInterceptorTest
>
> I wrote that up before we had the corresponding itests. It was
> invaluable to me when writing the original binding processing code.
> It doesn't have the situation described in OPENEJB-583, but it could
> be added so you'd have a small isolated unit test to walk through with
> a debugger.
Thanks Dave for the hint, but I need to stop working on it as I'm
heading to the Polish mountains practicing my skying (in)abilities and
will be offline until 01/03. If you happen to release beta-2 in the
meantime, just reassign it to beta-3. Have fun!
Jacek
--
Jacek Laskowski
http://www.JacekLaskowski.pl
Re: (OPENEJB-583) Problems excluding default interceptor
Posted by David Blevins <da...@visi.com>.
FYI, this test case is going to be invaluable to you:
org.apache.openejb.core.stateless.StatelessInterceptorTest
I wrote that up before we had the corresponding itests. It was
invaluable to me when writing the original binding processing code.
It doesn't have the situation described in OPENEJB-583, but it could
be added so you'd have a small isolated unit test to walk through with
a debugger.
-David
On Dec 27, 2007, at 6:37 AM, Jacek Laskowski (JIRA) wrote:
>
> [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-583?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
> ]
>
> Work on OPENEJB-583 started by Jacek Laskowski.
>
>> Problems excluding default interceptor
>> --------------------------------------
>>
>> Key: OPENEJB-583
>> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-583
>> Project: OpenEJB
>> Issue Type: Bug
>> Components: interceptors
>> Affects Versions: 3.0-beta-1
>> Reporter: Prasad Kashyap
>> Assignee: Jacek Laskowski
>> Fix For: 3.0-beta-2
>>
>>
>> http://www.nabble.com/forum/ViewPost.jtp?post=10271166&framed=y&skin=2756
>> This problem exists uniformly for both annotation specified and DD
>> specificied interceptors
>> If you try to exclude a class from default interceptors, the
>> lifecycle events are excluded but some of the business methods are
>> not.
>> When a @ExcludeDefault is specified at the class level, default
>> interceptors are excluded only for those business methods that do
>> not have a @ExcludeClass specified on them.
>> If a business method has a @ExcludeClass specified on it, it
>> ignores the @ExcludeDefault specified for the whole class (either
>> by annotation or xml).
>
> --
> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> -
> You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
>
>