Re: Yan: CDI 1.0 TCK Problem + validatePassivationDependencies
hi @ all,
we also have other parts which are required by the tck and aren't that nice.
e.g. the check in EventUtil#checkEventBindings costs quite a lot of
performance.
imo we should introduce something like a (Tck)RuleService which passes
the tck by default - we can provide an implementation which changes such
(simple) rules easily.
regards,
gerhard
2013/4/10 Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de
Oki time to explain this now.
Think about a method
@Produces @SessionScoped
public EntityManager createEM() { return emf.createEntityManager(); }
And this would fail, even if the EntityManagerImpl being returned might be
perfectly Serializable. This can actually only be verified at runtime and
not at scanning time. The only exception is if a return type is final - but
then it cannot get proxied anyway...
LieGrue,
strub
PS: I would not make a session scoped EM, but thats another story...
- Original Message -
From: Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de
To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 1:10 PM
Subject: Re: Yan: CDI 1.0 TCK Problem + validatePassivationDependencies
Don't you remember how many tests we challenged/excluded until the TCK
was
finally ok?
Well, this is another of those issues - but it got catched only pretty
late.
LieGrue,
strub
From: Gurkan Erdogdu gurkanerdo...@yahoo.com
To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
dev@openwebbeans.apache.org; Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 11:23 AM
Subject: Yan: CDI 1.0 TCK Problem + validatePassivationDependencies
Hi Mark
1.1.8 branch
Broken means that it is not necessary to pass this in TCK for CDI 1.0,
why
this test exist in TCK?
Thks.
Gurkan
Kimden: Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de
Kime: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
Gönderildiği Tarih: 9 Nis 2013 21:47 Salı
Konu: Re: CDI 1.0 TCK Problem + validatePassivationDependencies
because it's broken!
It's broken in the CDI-1.0 spec and we clarified the correct behaviour
in CDI-1.1.
Btw, which branch do you
speak of?
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
From: Gurkan Erdogdu gurkanerdo...@yahoo.com
To: openwebbeans-dev dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, April 9, 2013 11:17 AM
Subject: CDI 1.0 TCK Problem + validatePassivationDependencies
Hi
In AbstractProducerBean below method is commented out but TCK 1.0
still
checks
ProducerMethod's Serializable return type and fields.
public void validatePassivationDependencies()
{
// don't call super.validatePassivationDependencies()!
// the injection points of producers are the parameters of the
producermethod.
// since CDI-1.1 we must not check those for is serializable
anymore.
}
In CDI 1.1 this is corrected but TCK 1.0 still check this. Why is this
commented
out?
Gurkan
Re: Yan: CDI 1.0 TCK Problem + validatePassivationDependencies
Not nice != broken.
In the case of the serialization rule it was really broken and got 'clarified'
in cdi-1.1 ;)
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
From: Gerhard Petracek gerhard.petra...@gmail.com
To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 9:05 PM
Subject: Re: Yan: CDI 1.0 TCK Problem + validatePassivationDependencies
hi @ all,
we also have other parts which are required by the tck and aren't that nice.
e.g. the check in EventUtil#checkEventBindings costs quite a lot of
performance.
imo we should introduce something like a (Tck)RuleService which
passes
the tck by default - we can provide an implementation which changes such
(simple) rules easily.
regards,
gerhard
2013/4/10 Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de
Oki time to explain this now.
Think about a method
@Produces @SessionScoped
public EntityManager createEM() { return emf.createEntityManager(); }
And this would fail, even if the EntityManagerImpl being returned might be
perfectly Serializable. This can actually only be verified at runtime and
not at scanning time. The only exception is if a return type is final - but
then it cannot get proxied anyway...
LieGrue,
strub
PS: I would not make a session scoped EM, but thats another story...
- Original Message -
From: Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de
To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 1:10 PM
Subject: Re: Yan: CDI 1.0 TCK Problem +
validatePassivationDependencies
Don't you remember how many tests we challenged/excluded until the
TCK
was
finally ok?
Well, this is another of those issues - but it got catched only pretty
late.
LieGrue,
strub
From: Gurkan Erdogdu gurkanerdo...@yahoo.com
To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
dev@openwebbeans.apache.org; Mark Struberg
strub...@yahoo.de
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 11:23 AM
Subject: Yan: CDI 1.0 TCK Problem +
validatePassivationDependencies
Hi Mark
1.1.8 branch
Broken means that it is not necessary to pass this in TCK for CDI
1.0,
why
this test exist in TCK?
Thks.
Gurkan
Kimden: Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de
Kime: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
Gönderildiği Tarih: 9 Nis 2013 21:47 Salı
Konu: Re: CDI 1.0 TCK Problem + validatePassivationDependencies
because it's broken!
It's broken in the CDI-1.0 spec and we clarified the correct
behaviour
in CDI-1.1.
Btw, which branch do you
speak of?
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
From: Gurkan Erdogdu gurkanerdo...@yahoo.com
To: openwebbeans-dev dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, April 9, 2013 11:17 AM
Subject: CDI 1.0 TCK Problem +
validatePassivationDependencies
Hi
In AbstractProducerBean below method is commented out but TCK
1.0
still
checks
ProducerMethod's Serializable return type and fields.
public void validatePassivationDependencies()
{
// don't call
super.validatePassivationDependencies()!
// the injection points of producers are the parameters of the
producermethod.
// since CDI-1.1 we must not check those for is
serializable
anymore.
}
In CDI 1.1 this is corrected but TCK 1.0 still check this.
Why is this
commented
out?
Gurkan
Yan: CDI 1.0 TCK Problem + validatePassivationDependencies
Hi Mark
1.1.8 branch
Broken means that it is not necessary to pass this in TCK for CDI 1.0, why this
test exist in TCK?
Thks.
Gurkan
Kimden: Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de
Kime: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
Gönderildiği Tarih: 9 Nis 2013 21:47 Salı
Konu: Re: CDI 1.0 TCK Problem + validatePassivationDependencies
because it's broken!
It's broken in the CDI-1.0 spec and we clarified the correct behaviour in
CDI-1.1.
Btw, which branch do you speak of?
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
From: Gurkan Erdogdu gurkanerdo...@yahoo.com
To: openwebbeans-dev dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, April 9, 2013 11:17 AM
Subject: CDI 1.0 TCK Problem + validatePassivationDependencies
Hi
In AbstractProducerBean below method is commented out but TCK 1.0 still
checks
ProducerMethod's Serializable return type and fields.
public void validatePassivationDependencies()
{
// don't call super.validatePassivationDependencies()!
// the injection points of producers are the parameters of the
producermethod.
// since CDI-1.1 we must not check those for is serializable anymore.
}
In CDI 1.1 this is corrected but TCK 1.0 still check this. Why is this
commented
out?
Gurkan
Re: Yan: CDI 1.0 TCK Problem + validatePassivationDependencies
Don't you remember how many tests we challenged/excluded until the TCK was
finally ok?
Well, this is another of those issues - but it got catched only pretty late.
LieGrue,
strub
From: Gurkan Erdogdu gurkanerdo...@yahoo.com
To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org dev@openwebbeans.apache.org; Mark Struberg
strub...@yahoo.de
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 11:23 AM
Subject: Yan: CDI 1.0 TCK Problem + validatePassivationDependencies
Hi Mark
1.1.8 branch
Broken means that it is not necessary to pass this in TCK for CDI 1.0, why
this test exist in TCK?
Thks.
Gurkan
Kimden: Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de
Kime: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
Gönderildiği Tarih: 9 Nis 2013 21:47 Salı
Konu: Re: CDI 1.0 TCK Problem + validatePassivationDependencies
because it's broken!
It's broken in the CDI-1.0 spec and we clarified the correct behaviour in
CDI-1.1.
Btw, which branch do you
speak of?
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
From: Gurkan Erdogdu gurkanerdo...@yahoo.com
To: openwebbeans-dev dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, April 9, 2013 11:17 AM
Subject: CDI 1.0 TCK Problem + validatePassivationDependencies
Hi
In AbstractProducerBean below method is commented out but TCK 1.0 still
checks
ProducerMethod's Serializable return type and fields.
public void validatePassivationDependencies()
{
// don't call super.validatePassivationDependencies()!
// the injection points of producers are the parameters of the
producermethod.
// since CDI-1.1 we must not check those for is serializable anymore.
}
In CDI 1.1 this is corrected but TCK 1.0 still check this. Why is this
commented
out?
Gurkan
