I'm not sure what you mean by a "super interceptor", but if you mean it as in
"super man" (something better than an interceptor), then I would disagree, it's
actually a specialised form of interceptor.
The best use case I know of is the one John mentions - creating type safe
references to queries:
@QueryService
interface UserQuery {
@Query("select u from User u")
public List<User> getAllUsers();
@Query("select u from User u order by u.name")
public List<User> getAllUsersSortedByName();
}
Now, it may be the case that there aren't any other use cases for service
handlers, in which case we should perhaps just offer this particular service
handler - references to type safe queries - as I think this is an extremely
powerful idea.
Note, that at the moment service handlers are scheduled for CDI 1.1.
On 7 Mar 2012, at 02:35, Jason Porter wrote:
> Somewhat. I wouldn't really think of them as overrides, they, to me, seem
> more like items to do in addition to whatever the original impl does.
>
> ServiceHandlers to me seem more like super interceptors.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Mar 6, 2012, at 19:23, "John D. Ament" <john.d.am...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> @jason
>>
>> I think the concepts are very dissimilar. servicehandlers create the
>> implementation. delegates are more like overrides and need to know about
>> the method signature.
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 9:17 PM, Jason Porter <lightguard...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> I think the idea of ServiceHandlers are good, but, could we not do this
>>> with delegates?
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Mar 6, 2012, at 19:05, "John D. Ament" <john.d.am...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> @mark
>>>>
>>>> I don't think it's a hard requirement for it to be on an interface.
>>>>
>>>> One of the best use-cases we built at my job is using it for calling
>>>> PL/SQL. The JDBC bindings do work, but not pretty. we were able to
>>> create
>>>> a fairly clean wrapper API, generic enough for binding in/out parameters.
>>>>
>>>> JOhn
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> actually I don't really see a real benefit. I just don't yet grok the
>>> use
>>>>> case for real world projects.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why would one intercept an Interface and delegate the calls to a method
>>>>> handler?
>>>>> This could be neat for mocking, but there are better frameworks for
>>> that.
>>>>>
>>>>> thus
>>>>>
>>>>> -0.2
>>>>>
>>>>> LieGrue,
>>>>> strub
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>> From: Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petra...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>> Cc:
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 6, 2012 5:15 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-113] Review and Discuss
>>> ServiceHandler
>>>>>>
>>>>>> if you have a lot of shared code, you can extract it in 1-n method/s or
>>>>> an
>>>>>> abstract class which is still easier than a new concept.
>>>>>> at least i haven't seen an use-case which really needed it. that was
>>> the
>>>>>> reason for a +0 (which still means that i'm ok with adding it).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>> gerhard
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2012/3/6 Pete Muir <pm...@redhat.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, you mean just write a bean with all the boilerplate code in it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 6 Mar 2012, at 15:58, Gerhard Petracek wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> hi pete,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> instead of the interface you can just implement a bean which does the
>>>>>>> same.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>>>> gerhard
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2012/3/6 Pete Muir <pm...@redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What CDI mechanism would you use instead?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 5 Mar 2012, at 08:47, Gerhard Petracek wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> +0
>>>>>>>>>> no -1 because there are use-cases for it.
>>>>>>>>>> no +1 because i would use std. cdi mechanisms instead.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>>>>>> gerhard
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2012/3/4 Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petra...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> hi john,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> the sub-task is perfectly fine.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> gerhard
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 2012/3/4 John D. Ament <john.d.am...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi All
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I wanted to bring up the subject of ServiceHandler. I
>>>>>> added 113 as a
>>>>>>>>>>>> child
>>>>>>>>>>>> of DELTASPIKE-2, looked appropriate but not 100% sure
>>>>>> (so please let
>>>>>>> me
>>>>>>>>>>>> know if you think it's not appropriate as a
>>>>>> child). ServiceHandler
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>> feature in Solder that allows you to define an
>>>>>> interceptor that
>>>>>>> manages
>>>>>>>>>>>> generic calls against an injected interface. The API
>>>>>> is as follows:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> - @ServiceHandlerType(Class<?> clazz) - placed
>>>>>> on an annotation that
>>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>>>>> be placed on the interface. Indicates what
>>>>>> interceptor would be
>>>>>>>>> invoked
>>>>>>>>>>>> for calls against this interface.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It's then up to the application
>>>>>> developer/framework author to define
>>>>>>>>>>>> annotations that go on methods, as well as the
>>>>>> interceptor itself
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>>>>>> be invoked. The feature for ServiceHandler would be
>>>>>> to provide the
>>>>>>>>> API of
>>>>>>>>>>>> the type and then the infrastructure required to make
>>>>>> the interceptor
>>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>>>> called. Existing documentation of the feature:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> http://docs.jboss.org/seam/3/3.1.0.Final/reference/en-US/html/solder-servicehandler.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> john
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
