deltaspike-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Arne Limburg <arne.limb...@openknowledge.de>
Subject Re: How to replace and disable Interceptor at runtime.
Date Sun, 30 Dec 2012 10:46:50 GMT
Hi Jason,


As I said, the use case would be migration scenarios. I know big seam 2
projects that want to move do CDI and have big problems in going through
every usage of @BypassInterceptors to figure out, if it was used for
business logic reasons (i.e. to switch of transactions for that use case)
or if it was just for performance reasons.

For CDI one could imagine that there are use cases, too, where
@BypassInterceptors could be helpful. Think of a stereotype that defines
interceptor bindings and you have a bean with that stereotype and have
just one method where you don't want that interceptors.

So imho use cases are there, but I don't like @BypassInterceptors from an
architectural point of view, too.
So I am +-0 for adding it.

Cheers,
Arne

Am 29.12.12 22:30 schrieb "Cody Lerum" unter <cody.lerum@gmail.com>:

>+1 Jason
>
>
>On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Jason Porter
><lightguard.jp@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Arne: I'm not quite sure I see the point in doing this. Interceptors in
>> Seam2 were completely different than in CDI. If you don't want an
>> interceptor, remove the annotation, or take it out of the beans.xml.
>>
>> I also don't see a use case for @BypassInterceptors. If there's a use
>>case
>> for it, then we can consider it, but I don't want to start adding
>>things to
>> DeltaSpike without clearly defined use cases.
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Arne Limburg <
>> arne.limburg@openknowledge.de
>> > wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Hantsy,
>> >
>> >
>> > In general you could write an extension that modifies the
>>AnnotatedType
>> to
>> > remove the annotation that declares the interceptor binding.
>> >
>> > @all We should think about supporting @BypassInterceptors in
>>Deltaspike,
>> > wdyt?
>> > Not that I like this "feature" of Seam 2 that much (imho it works
>>around
>> > some design flaws of Seam 2), but it would make a migration from Seam
>>2
>> to
>> > Deltaspike much easier.
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > Arne
>> >
>> > Am 29.12.12 03:29 schrieb "hantsy" unter <hantsy@yahoo.com.cn>:
>> >
>> > >Thanks, gerhard. Is there a way to disable interceptors globally or
>> > >bypass some interceptors on certain managed beans?
>> > >
>> > >Hantsy
>> > >
>> > >On 12/28/2012 10:39, Gerhard Petracek wrote:
>> > >> hi hantsy,
>> > >>
>> > >> in deltaspike (and codi) we are using interceptor-strategies which
>> > >>allow to
>> > >> provide alternative (/specialized) interceptor-implementations (see
>> > >> org.apache.deltaspike.core.spi.InterceptorStrategy as well as the
>> usage
>> > >>of
>> > >> it).
>> > >>
>> > >> regards,
>> > >> gerhard
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> 2012/12/28 hantsy <hantsy@yahoo.com.cn>
>> > >>
>> > >>> Hi all,
>> > >>>
>> > >>> I know there are some way to use alternative Managed Bean at
>>runtime
>> in
>> > >>> CDI. but how to process Interceptor.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> 1. I want to use custom Interceptor(esp extended from the
>>Interceptor
>> > >>> and provides some different behavior) instead of the one shipped
>>by
>> > >>>some
>> > >>> framework/tools at runtime ?
>> > >>>
>> > >>> 2. How to disable an interceptor at runtime for one
>>ManagedBean(like
>> > >>> Seam 2 bypass annotation), and disable it globally?
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Hantsy
>> > >>>
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jason Porter
>> http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com
>> http://twitter.com/lightguardjp
>>
>> Software Engineer
>> Open Source Advocate
>>
>> PGP key id: 926CCFF5
>> PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu
>>


Mime
View raw message