[jsr342-experts] Re: Implicit Producers
- From: "Reza Rahman" <reza_rahman@...>
- To: <jsr342-experts@...>
- Subject: [jsr342-experts] Re: Implicit Producers
- Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 13:30:19 -0400
In case it helps, I'll respond to this as part of my more comprehensive
response to Linda's questions. We've had ideas on this too for a while.
From: Pete Muir [mailto:pmuir@...]
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 7:33 AM
Subject: [jsr342-experts] Re: Implicit Producers
Do you have any specific ideas around what this would look like? It's a nice
way to describe it :-)
On 11 Apr 2012, at 04:26, David Blevins wrote:
> Another concrete topic on aligning things (noticed this in some of the
> Many times it has come up that we want to make more things injectable via
@Inject at the platform level. I'm totally on board with that and have been
doing some of the suggesting.
> I've started mentally calling them "implicit" producers as effectively
what we're doing is adding producers to applications that weren't explicitly
created by the application.
> As a large number of applications in existence will already have producer
methods or fields that produce various JavaEE resources currently only
available via @Resource, @EJB, etc. there is a bit of a compatibility issue.
> Even if we add producers with full spec-standard qualifiers, any existing
injection points that do not use qualifiers become ambiguous.
> It would be great to hear some thoughts on how to solve that.