beehive-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kenneth Tam <>
Subject Re: Control interceptor question
Date Wed, 11 Jan 2006 19:34:07 GMT
Hey Xibin,

Good catch -- this was just oversight.  You're absolutely right,
postEvent should also have a Throwable param in its signature.  I'll
be happy to make this change, but I'm not completely on top of the
dot-release cycle right now, so I want to make sure this isn't going
to give anyone problems right now before actually submitting.


On 1/10/06, Xibin Zeng <> wrote:
> Hi -
> There are 4 methods on the
> org.apache.beehive.controls.spi.svc.Interceptorinterface. For a
> control operation, preInvoke/postInvoke are called before
> and after the operation, respectively. The postInvoke callback contains the
> exception that the operation threw. For preEvent/postEvent, however, there
> is no exception information passed to the postEvent callback. This looks
> inconsistent to me. Imagine that you need to enforce J2EE transaction
> behaviors using these interceptors (i.e. rollback a transaction in case of a
> system exception), you will need to know what exception has been generated
> as the result of invoking the operation or event callback. You could do this
> for your control operations, but not event callbacks, since the exception
> caught during event callback isn't passsed to the interceptor.
> There might be reasons why Beehive chose to implement the 2 sets of API
> differently. In my humble opinion, I think we should make them symmetric. If
> I missed something here, please let me know.
> Thanks
> Xibin Zeng

View raw message