How does this ordering compare to section 2.1 of JSR 250. I am not suggesting any changes, I was just curious if that specification is similiar.
On 3/26/07, Ken Tam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 3/8/07, Chad Schoettger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I would like to propose a solution for BEEHIVE-1076: > > "interceptors for annotations don't get wired into generated control > beans if the annotation is at the class level" > > > Just to be clear this is not a bug, it is an enhancement to existing > functionality. Since this work introduces new functionality it > becomes necessary to clearly define the behavior of class-level > interceptors in Beehive. > > I prefer a simple design which is intuitive for Beehive developers, so > here's what I am proposing: > > 1) Use the existing Beehive annotation @InterceptorAnnotation to meta-annotate > class-level interceptor annotations. The only difference between a > class-level and method-level interceptor annotation would be the type it > annotates. This would allow a developer to create a single interceptor > annotation which could be used at the class or method level. > > 2) A class-level interceptor gets applied to each method in the class > (including inherited methods). > > 3) If a method within an class is annotated with the same interceptor > annotation as the class only the method's interceptor is fired. > > 4) Interceptor prioritization does not change, method-level and class-level > interceptor priorities could still be defined in the same manner by > controls-interceptors.config file. > > > Questions/Comments? Any input is greatly appreciated. +1, seems straightforward. Just to clarify #3 -- I'm reading your proposal as "if a given method is somehow parameterized by the same interceptor annotation multiple times (via some combination of annotated inheritance and/or annotation at both type and method level), then the most specific (most inherited, method level) instance of the annotation wins". Sound right? > > - Thanks, Chad >
