deltaspike-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] BeanManagerProvider API
Date Mon, 23 Jan 2012 08:12:18 GMT
well in that case I gonna blame myself *slapme* and gonna change it silently :D

LieGrue,
strub

>________________________________
> From: Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petracek@gmail.com>
>To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org; Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de> 
>Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 8:57 AM
>Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] BeanManagerProvider API
> 
>
>@mark:
>you can ask the person who did it for myfaces codi (see [1]) :)
>
>
>regards,
>gerhard
>
>[1] 
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=929170
>
>
>
>
>2012/1/23 Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>
>
>+1
>>
>>But why do we need the manual setBeanManager public at all?
>>I'll go on and make it protected.
>>
>>
>>LieGrue,
>>strub
>>
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>
>>> From: Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petracek@gmail.com>
>>> To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Cc:
>>
>>> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 7:56 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] BeanManagerProvider API
>>>
>>> hi christian,
>>>
>>> thx for moving this discussion to the mailing list!
>>>
>>> actually you don't have to check it because it would fail earlier.
>>> due to the basic mechanism you would see an IllegalStateException in
>>> #getInstance, if the cdi implementation isn't configured correctly (this
>>> topic is related to an upcoming discussion).
>>>
>>> the only case i can see right now would be caused by a manual call of
>>> #setBeanManager which resets it.
>>> -> imo we have to decide if we allow such a manual call.
>>>
>>> in general we should also discuss if we re-use existing exception types (if
>>> it makes sense) or if we create our own types.
>>>
>>> regards,
>>> gerhard
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2012/1/23 Christian Kaltepoth <christian@kaltepoth.de>
>>>
>>>>  Hey @all,
>>>>
>>>>  yesterday I had a deeper look at the BeanManagerProvider
>>>>  implementation and found something that could be improved. I created
>>>>  DELTASPIKE-56 (see [1]) for this but it turned out that we should
>>>>  discuss this topic on the mailing list.
>>>>
>>>>  I saw that getBeanManager() may return null in some rare
>>>>  circumstances. Unfortunately this forces everyone calling this method
>>>>  to check the result for null. I think most code calling the method
>>>>  absolutely requires the BeanManager and cannot proceed without it.
>>>>
>>>>  My first idea was to add another method getRequiredBeanManager() that
>>>>  doesn't return null if the BeanManager is not available but instead
>>>>  throws a meaningful runtime exception. That's what Solder does per
>>>>  default. Calling Solder's BeanManagerLocator.getBeanManager() without
>>>>  a BeanManager being available will result in a
>>>>  BeanManagerUnavailableException (see [2]).
>>>>
>>>>  However Mark suggested that throwing an exception should be the
>>>>  default behavior. I for myself like Mark's idea.
>>>>
>>>>  What do you think?
>>>>
>>>>  Christian
>>>>
>>>>  [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DELTASPIKE-56
>>>>  [2]
>>>>
>>> https://github.com/seam/solder/blob/master/api/src/main/java/org/jboss/solder/beanManager/BeanManagerLocator.java#L82
>>>>
>>>>  --
>>>>  Christian Kaltepoth
>>>>  Blog: http://chkal.blogspot.com/
>>>>  Twitter: http://twitter.com/chkal
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message