Thanks Jean-Louis!
I fear this does not play together nicely with CDI currently. AnnotatedType has just no inheritance information right now. We just assume standard Java inheritance rules.
Also please think about portable Extensions: how could you apply an Interceptor dynamically to a scanned class? How would you tell the container that you like to have the interceptor on the inherited methods as well?
LieGrue,
strub
>________________________________
> From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <jeanouii_at_gmail.com>
>To: "users_at_ejb-spec.java.net" <users_at_ejb-spec.java.net>
>Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 8:46 AM
>Subject: [ejb-spec users] Re: A small interceptor question
>
>
>Hi Mark,
>
>With EJBs the inheritance is pretty new. It was container specific before EJB 3.1. Since 3.1, there is now a chapter to deal with session beans inheritance. In the document EJB 3.2 core PD, the chapter is 4.9.2.1 Session Bean Superclass.
>
>It's more or less clear that there is nothing inherited from super classes. For instance,
>"There are no special rules that apply to the processing of annotations or the deployment descriptor for this case."
>and
>"In this regard, the use of session bean classes as superclasses merely represents a convenient use of implementation inheritance but does not have component inheritance semantics."
>
>So I would say that even 1. is false.
>The @TransactionAttribute (not @Transactional for EJBs) does not have inherited attribute. AFAIR only ApplicationException has an inherited attribute but it only applies to exceptions not beans.
>
>In regards to the second question, I would answer yes, annotations in the subclass also apply to inherited methods.
>
>That's how EJBs work for now. No issue to discuss that and refine the behavior if possible.
>
>Jean-Louis
>
>
>
>
>2012/10/18 Mark Struberg <struberg_at_yahoo.de>
>
>Dear EJB EG!
>>
>>We have a small question over in the CDI EG and Apache DeltaSpike regard interception of methods of a superclass.
>>
>>When dealing with multiple class hierarchies of intercepted classes (@InterceptorBinding style for now) we have the 2 following use cases:
>>
>>
>>@Transactional
>>public class A {
>> public void methodA();
>>}
>>
>>
>>public class B extends A {
>> public void methodB();
>>}
>>
>>Question
>> 1: does the @Transactional interceptor get inherited and both methodA()
>> and methodB() get intercepted, or will only methodA() get intercepted? Let's
>> assume the Transactional annotation itself is marked as inherited. Imo it should, right? if @Transactional doesn't have @Inherited then methodB() will not get intercepted, right?
>>
>>
>>And now for the other (bit more tricky) case:
>>
>>public class A {
>> public void methodA();
>>}
>>
>>@Transactional
>>public class B extends A {
>> public void methodB();
>>}
>>
>>Question
>> 2: does the @Transactional interceptor also affect inherited methods
>>and both methodA() and methodB() get intercepted, or will only methodB()
>> get intercepted? I found no clear answer in the interceptors spec. From the gut feeling we think methodA() should get intercepted as well...
>>
>>Could you please point us to the paragraph where the behaviour got defined?
>>I could only find paragraphs about inherited interceptors itself, but not about inheritance behaviour of intercepted classes.
>>
>>Next question while I'm at it: the behaviour of @InterceptorBinding style Interceptors and @Interceptors is the same regarding the scenarios above?
>>
>>
>>Oh and btw, the next revision please with paragraph numbers - makes it lot easiers to reference ;)
>>
>>txs and LieGrue,
>>strub
>>
>>
>
>
>