Hi Mark

We have the beans.xml in place, will check the private and exception on
monday when Im back to office.

Regards
Lars-Fredrik

On Nov 8, 2014 11:13 PM, "Mark Struberg" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Lars-Fredrik!
>
> @AroundInvoke is indeed supported in CDI-1.0 and thus also in WAS. I'm
using it heavily at some customers . Do you have a beans.xml in WEB-INF?
WAS needs this (not required by the spec, but anyway).
> Probably WAS has a problem with private around-invoke methods. You might
also check if your method declares 'throws Exception'. This is required by
the spec ans WAS is pretty picky about it.
>
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> On Saturday, 8 November 2014, 17:42, Romain Manni-Bucau <
[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> >
> >
> >Just a doubt: you asked about around invoke but spoke about timeout.
Timeout should be supported IIRC but we did it after several releases ie
not 1.0.
> >Le 8 nov. 2014 15:02, "Lars-Fredrik Smedberg" <[email protected]> a
écrit :
> >
> >Thanks Romain.... then I will submit a bugreport....
> >>
> >>
> >>/Fredrik
> >>
> >>
> >>On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>Iirc aroundinvoke was supported since the beginning
> >>>Le 8 nov. 2014 14:05, "Lars-Fredrik Smedberg" <[email protected]> a
écrit :
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> @Romain
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>I know WAS uses OWB and, as you say, some obsolete version.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>I was just curios in what CDI and OWB version the support was added.
If I try to bug report something that is not in Java EE 6 I will get the
cold hand I guess :)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>It is in tomee and by spec. No idea in WAS which has obsolete versions
> >>>>>Le 8 nov. 2014 13:47, "Lars-Fredrik Smedberg" <[email protected]> a
écrit :
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Hi!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>As I can see JSR318 contains two specifications, EJB 3.1
Specification and Interceptors 1.1 (and later on Interceptors 1.2 MR)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>EJB 3.1 as well as Interceptors 1.1 are included in Java EE6.
> >>>>>>Interceptors 1.2 is included in Javav EE7.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>When I look in Inteceptors Specification 1.1 I find no references
to a specific CDI version or to CDI at all.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>When I look in Interceptors Specification 1.2 I see the following:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>1.2 Relationship to Other Specifications
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>"...and the CDI specification requires support for the chapters 2,3
and 5 (excluding 5.5)."
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>CDI specification here points to "JSR346 - Context and Dependency
Injection for the Java EE Platform 1.1 (CDI specification)"
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>2.7 Timeout Method Inteceptors
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>"Interceptor methods that interpose on timeout methods are denoted
by the AroundTimeout annotation."
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>"Around-timeout methods can have public, private, protected or
package level access. An around-timeout method must not be declared as
abstract, final or static."
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Question:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>1) From the Interceptors 1.2 I understand that @AroundInvoke is
okay to use with a CDI interceptor using CDI 1.1, correct?
> >>>>>>2) What about CDI 1.0 (JSR 299) and Interceptors 1.1, is
@AroundInvoke also okay with CDI 1.0? I find no information on that?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>The reason I ask is that I do not get it to work with WebSphere
8.5.5 that uses OWB (with a version that atleast should support CDI 1.0).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Regards
> >>>>>>Lars-Fredrik
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>--
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Med vänlig hälsning / Best regards
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Lars-Fredrik Smedberg
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY:
> >>>>>>The information contained in this electronic message and any
> >>>>>>attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of
the
> >>>>>>address(es) and may contain confidential or privileged information.
If
> >>>>>>you are not the intended recipient, please notify Lars-Fredrik
Smedberg
> >>>>>>immediately at [email protected], and destroy all copies of this
> >>>>>>message and any attachments.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>--
> >>>>
> >>>>Med vänlig hälsning / Best regards
> >>>>
> >>>>Lars-Fredrik Smedberg
> >>>>
> >>>>STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY:
> >>>>The information contained in this electronic message and any
> >>>>attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the
> >>>>address(es) and may contain confidential or privileged information. If
> >>>>you are not the intended recipient, please notify Lars-Fredrik
Smedberg
> >>>>immediately at [email protected], and destroy all copies of this
> >>>>message and any attachments.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>--
> >>
> >>Med vänlig hälsning / Best regards
> >>
> >>Lars-Fredrik Smedberg
> >>
> >>STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY:
> >>The information contained in this electronic message and any
> >>attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the
> >>address(es) and may contain confidential or privileged information. If
> >>you are not the intended recipient, please notify Lars-Fredrik Smedberg
> >>immediately at [email protected], and destroy all copies of this
> >>message and any attachments.
> >
> >

Reply via email to