The answer is yes. I think 4.3.1 explains this rather clearly: Formally, a bean X is said to specialize another bean Y if either:
- X directly specializes Y, or - a bean Z exists, such that X directly specializes Z and Z specializes Y. There isn't a crystal clear example of #2 in this section (it's implied by references to types in previous examples). In your case X = Jsf2CodiConfig, Z = Jsf1CodiConfig and Y = CodiConfig X wins. -Dan On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi folks! > > I have the following situation and couldn't find a _clear_ answer to my > question (various hints, but as I said: not really clear): > > > class CodiConfig > > @Specializes > class Jsf1CodiConfig extends CodiConfig > > @Specializes > class Jsf2CodiConfig extends Jsf1CodiConfig > > > If I > @Inject CodiConfig cc; > > is it well defined in the spec that I must get Jsf2CodiConfig? > > Imo it should be, but before I 'fix' this in OWB, I need an ok that this > transitive behaviour is conform with the spec. And of course that Weld is > behaving in the same way ;) > > txs and LieGrue, > strub > > > > > _______________________________________________ > weld-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev > -- Dan Allen Principal Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action Registered Linux User #231597 http://mojavelinux.com http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen
_______________________________________________ weld-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev
