That looks closer to what the previous code was doing as it appears to be building a new AnnotatedType from the class.
I'm not sure building a new AnnotatedType is the right thing to do either, as it seems we would want to get the AnnotatedType that was potentially set via the event earlier. In any case that was the previous behavior as well so I think its fine for now. On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Thomas Andraschko < [email protected]> wrote: > 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? > > > > > > > > > >
