Hi Brice
On 15/12/11 20:04, Brice wrote:
Hi Sergey,
I think I hit another issue. I think I got a workaround, yet I'm not sure it is
the best way to do this. But first I'll explain the faced problem :
I would like to map some exception that might be raised during the message
handling, some raised by the invoker; so an ExceptionMapper could fit in with
some elegance.
However, in my Response I would like to get some "technical" data that will
most probably located on an annotation aside the other JAXRS annotations (@GET, @Path,
etc.).
But the signature is "Response toResponse(Exception)", so I don't have any
information on the targeted object.
You can get CXF-specific MessageContext injected in that mapper and use
messageContext.getContextualProperty(OperationResourceInfo.class); and
OperationResourceInfo.getAnnotatedMethod will return Method with the
annotations, you can get to the class-level annotations from there too
if needed
Also I don't have a Response for this exxcpetion when an exception occur in
"JAXRSInInterceptor.handelMessage(Message)" then I might loose all the proxies
information (thread local is cleared).
JAXRSInInterceptor checks ExceptionMappers if the exception is thrown
during handleMessage(Message)
So the workaround would be to also have a RequestHandler :
- the "ExceptionMapper" will create a Response with an incomplete entity
- the "RequestHandler" in the "handleResponse(Message, OperationResourceInfo, Response)" might be
able create a new Response from the original and to "enhance" the entity with the information from the
annotations. The annotation will be accessed through :
"message.getExchange().get(OperationResourceInfo.class).getMethodToInvoke().getAnnotation(SomeCustomAnnotation.class)".
In my opinion this approach looks a wrong, but yet again it is a neophyte
workaround.
This is possible, why not, but hope the above hint re
OperationResourceInfo can make it a bit simpler
Cheers, Sergey
What do you think ? Would it be possible to achieve a better and simpler
solution than having to split this logic ?
Thanks again for your time and consideration :)
--
Brice
