My argument against the @Named annotation wasn't about the number of extra key strokes (as you pointed out, there is only one!) I was merely saying that to me, if you say that a component has a name, it would make more sense that it has a "name" attribute, not a separate annotation. Are you saying that because many annotations have to share common attributes that those common attributes should be turned into individual annotations just so you don't have to repeat them on each one? Take the @Stateless and @Stateful annotation. Are you saying that the EJB 3 spec is wrong in having duplicated the set of attributes they have in them? I can understand that when it comes to extending the framework and developing your own custom annotations it makes it a little bit easier because you don't have to carry over that attribute, but for clarity's sake and because I find it semantically more accurate, I like my idea better. It wouldn't be that much to ask that component annotations! must define a name attribute. Then again, who am I to decide, right? Sorry for busting your balls, but I like to argument. And what's wrong with argumenting anyways? Isn't it how things get better?
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4089439#4089439 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4089439 _______________________________________________ jboss-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
