> We're talking about if a subclass adds an interceptor, is it applied to the
> methods defined on the superclass, or not? (Mark, correct me if I got that
> wrong).
Yes.
But I think we also do need a sanity check on all the other CDI features as well. And we have to check if Extensions can deal with that.
It would be perfect if EJBs and CDI beans would follow the same rules. Otoh I don't like to restrict CDI beans unnecessarily because EJB still has some ancient restrictions which have no technical validity nowadays but originate from some EJB-2 restrictions.
LieGrue,
strub
----- Original Message -----
> From: Pete Muir <pmuir_at_bleepbleep.org.uk>
> To: users_at_ejb-spec.java.net
> Cc:
> Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 4:06 PM
> Subject: [ejb-spec users] Re: A small interceptor question
>
>
> On 26 Oct 2012, at 14:59, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO wrote:
>
>> 2012/10/26 Pete Muir <pmuir_at_bleepbleep.org.uk>
>> >> There is a different behavior if the inherited class is a
> component or a simple class for EJB.
>>
>> What is this difference?
>>
>>
>> 4.9.2.1 Session Bean Superclass
>> --> says that no behavior inherited from another component (ie. session
> bean)
>>
>> 4.9.2 Session Bean Class
>> --> non-component-defining annotations are inherited by the subclass
>>
>> Don't you have the same reading?
>
> Sorry, I was being lazy ;-)
>
> Anyway, this is still not really the issue, AIUI.
>
> We're talking about if a subclass adds an interceptor, is it applied to the
> methods defined on the superclass, or not? (Mark, correct me if I got that
> wrong).
>