@Thomas and also remove the isActive call I guess? On Mar 26, 2015 5:59 PM, "Thomas Andraschko" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi, > > i just added the null check to get sure. > Removing the check + adding a unit test for it would be a better way. > > > 2015-03-26 17:45 GMT+01:00 Lars-Fredrik Smedberg <[email protected]>: > > > Hi > > > > Curious, I saw the following in the ContextUtils sourcecode when I was > > looking for some ideas to solve a problem.... > > > > public static boolean isContextActive(Class<? extends Annotation> > > scopeAnnotationClass, BeanManager beanManager) > > { > > try > > { > > if (beanManager.getContext(scopeAnnotationClass) == null > > || > > !beanManager.getContext(scopeAnnotationClass).isActive()) > > { > > return false; > > } > > } > > catch (ContextNotActiveException e) > > { > > return false; > > } > > > > return true; > > } > > > > When I looked at the documentation for BeanManager I saw that getContext > > always returns a Context or throw a ContextNotActiveException (amongst > > other exceptions), so the null check should not be needed or? > > > > The documenation also mention that the getContext method always return an > > active context... > > > > Is the code there to solve some compatibility issues or for other > > historical reasons or should it read (or similar): > > > > public static boolean isContextActive(Class<? extends Annotation> > > scopeAnnotationClass, BeanManager beanManager) > > { > > try > > { > > beanManager.getContext(scopeAnnotationClass); > > return true; > > } > > catch (ContextNotActiveException e) > > { > > return false; > > } > > } > > > > Regards > > LF > > >
