Perhaps I am misunderstanding, but if you use a subclass to implement interceptors/decorators doesn't that stop you from doing so on classes that are final? I know there is a proxy restriction on final classes, but not aware of a restriction on decorators/interceptors.
Sincerely, Joe Bergmark On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Gurkan Erdogdu <[email protected]>wrote: > > FYI. > > > > ----- Forwarded Message ---- > From: Gavin King <[email protected]> > To: Gurkan Erdogdu <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] > Sent: Tue, October 27, 2009 8:49:53 PM > Subject: Re: [weld-dev] Using Interceptor/Decorator On Dependent Scoped > Beans > > Yes, this is required and useful. > > However, interceptors/decorators are not really intended to be applied > via the "client proxy" that the spec talks about. In fact, the spec is > written to allow the interception to be implemented without any > separate proxy object at all (using a subclass). > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Gurkan Erdogdu <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi; > > > > > > Does the 299 specification indicate that interceptors and decorators > should > > not be called for dependent scoped beans? > > > > Currently we do not implement Interceptor/Decorator on @Dependent scoped > > beans in OWB because we do all interceptor/decorator stuff using proxy > and > > @Dependent scoped beans do not require client proxy. > > > > Does anyone has a good use case/example when dependent scoped beans are > > useful or necessary? > > > > Thanks; > > > > --Gurkan > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > weld-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev > > > > > > -- > Gavin King > [email protected] > http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin > http://hibernate.org > http://seamframework.org > > > >
