imo section 4.1 of the cdi spec is pretty clear. regards, gerhard
2013/12/18 Thomas Andraschko <[email protected]> > Ahh i see! > > To be honest, i'm not very experiences in this area too! > > I tried it with this code: > > AnnotatedType<? super C> annotatedToSpecialize = > > > webBeansContext.getAnnotatedElementFactory().newAnnotatedType(getAnnotated().getJavaClass().getSuperclass()); > > while > (annotatedToSpecialize.isAnnotationPresent(Specializes.class)) > { > annotatedToSpecialize = > > webBeansContext.getAnnotatedElementFactory().newAnnotatedType(annotatedToSpecialize.getJavaClass().getSuperclass()); > } > > defineName(annotatedToSpecialize, > > WebBeansUtil.getManagedBeanDefaultName(annotatedToSpecialize.getJavaClass().getSimpleName())); > > and its working fine too. > All unit tests passing. > > Should i commit it? > > > > 2013/12/18 Joseph Bergmark <[email protected]> > > > Sorry, I'll try to be more clear. Again, I'm not very experienced in > this > > area of OWB, so my interpretation could be wrong or this could be handled > > in a different code path entirely. > > > > The new code is looking directly at the Class itself for the @Specializes > > annotation. I'm suggesting that perhaps instead it should be looking at > > the AnnotatedType for the annotation > (AnnotatedType.isAnnotatationPresent) > > in case a portable extension has called setAnnotatedType during a > > ProcessAnnotatedType event and has added @Specializes. > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Thomas Andraschko < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hey, > > > > > > i'm not exactly sure if understand your question correctly but i will > > > explain you my code change. > > > > > > I think specialization per se was working fine but the old code just > > looked > > > for a @Named on the direct parent. > > > > > > e.g. > > > > > > @Named BeanA > > > @Specializes BeanB extends BeanA > > > @Specializes BeanC extends BeanC > > > > > > It tried to extract the name for BeanC from BeanB but actually it must > > look > > > for @Named on BeanA. > > > > > > > > > 2013/12/18 Joseph Bergmark <[email protected]> > > > > > > > I'll be the first to admit I'm not very familiar with this code area, > > but > > > > is it possible that this change could mean that we miss @Specializes > > > added > > > > to the AnnotatedType classes in the super class hierarchy, as you are > > > > walking up the class objects themselves looking for the annotation? > > > > > > > > > >
