No, the TCK is part of the deliverable for the specification. As is the API 
JavaDoc. 

Also the spec mentions the 'Injection for Java' specification (== JSR-330) as 
reference.


LieGrue,
strub



>________________________________
> From: Kristoffer Sjögren <[email protected]>
>To: Mark Struberg <[email protected]> 
>Cc: Martin Kouba <[email protected]>; "[email protected]" 
><[email protected]> 
>Sent: Saturday, 7 September 2013, 20:54
>Subject: Re: [weld-dev] PostConstruct & PreDestroy in Java SE
> 
>
>
>Alright, the specification and TCK is inconsistent. But as a user, I dont care 
>about the TCK and it does not make sense to enforce requirements on the 
>specification in the TCK. For users, strictly speaking, anything not stated in 
>the specification is unsupported. Correct?
>
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>
>
>On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 8:03 PM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>And before there are any questions: it's not directly stated inside the CDI 
>spec but in the TCK documentation:
>>
>>http://docs.jboss.org/cdi/tck/reference/1.0.4.SP1/pdf/jsr299-tck-reference-guide.pdf
>>
>>"JSR-330 - CDI builds on JSR-330, and as such JSR-299 implementations must 
>>additionally pass the JSR-330 TCK."
>>
>>again: I agree with Martin that you should better not use it. But it should 
>>work nontheless.
>>
>>
>>LieGrue,
>>strub
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>
>>> From: Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
>>> To: Martin Kouba <[email protected]>; Kristoffer Sjögren <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>>> Sent: Saturday, 7 September 2013, 19:22
>>> Subject: Re: [weld-dev] PostConstruct & PreDestroy in Java SE
>>>
>>>T he wording is not correct.
>>
>>>
>>> Each JSR-299 Container must _fully_ implement the JSR-330 specification and 
>>> pass
>>> the JSR-330 TCK. Thus each CDI Container MUST support 
>>> javax.inject.Singleton.
>>> But it's actually not really defined in detail how this scope should behave.
>>> And the atinject and EE specs also define that @PostConstruct and 
>>> @PreDestroy
>>> must work for @Singleton beans. So this is imo a bug. But otoh I personally
>>> would suggest to not use javax.inject.Singleton because of the 
>>> aforementioned
>>> underspecified behaviout.
>>>
>>> LieGrue,
>>> strub
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>  From: Martin Kouba <[email protected]>
>>>>  To: Kristoffer Sjögren <[email protected]>
>>>>  Cc: [email protected]
>>>>  Sent: Friday, 6 September 2013, 14:31
>>>>  Subject: Re: [weld-dev] PostConstruct & PreDestroy in Java SE
>>>>
>>>>  Actually there's no singleton scope and corresponding built-in context
>>>>  defined in the CDI spec. Though Weld API contains
>>>>  org.jboss.weld.context.SingletonContext. Also the docs are outdated
>>>>  (chapter 5.4. The singleton pseudo-scope). I think relevant classes
>>>>  should be deprecated and the docs updated.
>>>>
>>>>  With regard to lifecycle callbacks - Weld only invalidates application
>>>>  context during shutdown right now [1].
>>>>
>>>>  Martin
>>>>
>>>>  [1]
>>>>
>>> https://github.com/weld/core/blob/master/impl/src/main/java/org/jboss/weld/bootstrap/WeldRuntime.java#L56
>>>>
>>>>  Dne 6.9.2013 14:09, Kristoffer Sjögren napsal(a):
>>>>>   Hi
>>>>>
>>>>>   We're running Weld 2.0.3.Final in a Java SE environment and have
>>>>>   encountered a precarious situation where it seems like Weld is not
>>>>>   consistent in handling the lifecycle of singleton beans.
>>>>>
>>>>>   We have singleton beans with @PostConstruct and @PreDestroy methods.
>>>>>   During Weld.initialize() all @PostConstruct methods are called. But
>>>>>   during @PreDestroy methods are never called during Weld.shutdown().
>>>>>   @PreDestroy is only called on beans which are @ApplicationScoped.
>>>>>
>>>>>   Is this according to specification or a bug?
>>>>>
>>>>>   Cheers,
>>>>>   -Kristoffer
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>   _______________________________________________
>>>>>   weld-dev mailing list
>>>>>   [email protected]
>>>>>   https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>>  weld-dev mailing list
>>>>  [email protected]
>>>>  https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> weld-dev mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev
>>>
>>
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
weld-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/weld-dev

Reply via email to