This is actually the opposite here. Guice is stricter than the jsr330 javadoc says it should be. It's either a bug in the javadoc, maybe a (reverse) bug in the compatibility tests, or just an oversight in Guice (that was maybe coded against an earlier revision?).
sam On Jun 24, 2013 8:05 PM, "Jesse Wilson" <[email protected]> wrote: > JSR-330 is stricter than Guice. If you use the javax.inject.Inject > annotation, you need to follow their rules. > > > On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 7:30 PM, Steven Goldfeder > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Hey all, >> >> In the javax.inject.Inject >> javadoc<http://docs.oracle.com/javaee/6/api/javax/inject/Inject.html>, >> it says that injectable methods "may return a result". But the Guice >> documentation <https://code.google.com/p/google-guice/wiki/JSR330> indicates >> that JSR-330 method injection does not allow void methods. My assumption is >> that the javax documentation is correct, but I just wanted to double check. >> >> Thanks! >> >> Steven >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "google-guice" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-guice. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "google-guice" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-guice. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
