jsr342-experts@javaee-spec.java.net

[jsr342-experts] Re: [jsr345-experts] Bean Validation aligment in EE 7 (was [jsr345-experts] Bean Validation support for EJBs?)

From: Antonio Goncalves <antonio.goncalves_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 19:50:53 +0100

Emmanuel's answer (he has no write access to the ML) :

"The Java EE interception technology does not allow to intercept methods
calls when calling a method from within the bean. That's a general
problem that applies for all Java EE so at least that is consistent.

I think it makes a lot of sense to support JAX-WS. But JAX-WS has no
integration with CDI so we could not ride along the CDI integration to
validate method calls.

About servlets, I don't see the validation of methods called by the
servlet container as very useful. In your example, when is a request
object null?

I discussed the JAXB validation integration possibilities with the spec
lead a long time ago but unfortunately, I don't think either of us
worked further on the subject. That is something I've seen asked several
times by the community though.

Emmanuel"

On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Antonio Goncalves <
antonio.goncalves_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> A few months ago in the EJB 3.2 EG ML we talked about aligning BV in EJBs.
> We've also exchanged a few emails with Emmanuel Bernard (CCed) about BV
> aligment in other specification. As a developer I expect BV method level
> validation to work in every EE specification. What do you think ? If it's
> the case, I would expect this to work :
>
>
> *_at_WebServlet*
> public class MyServlet {
>
> public void doGet(*_at_NotNull* HttpServletRequest req, @NotNull
> HttpServletResponse resp) {}
> }
>
> or
>
> *_at_WebService*
> public class MyWS {
>
> @WebMethod
> *_at_NotNull*
> public String methodA(@WebParam(name = "myParam") *_at_NotNull* String s
> )
> }
>
>
> So that means a JAX-WS update will have to be made (JAX-WS 2.3 ?). With
> WebServices that would also mean that BV will be integrated with JAXB (but
> I think it's planned, Emmanuel correct me if I'm wrong).
>
>
> What do you think ?
> Antonio
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Antonio Goncalves <
> antonio.goncalves_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> With the new Bean Validation 1.1 method-level validation I expect
>> something to work out of the box (with or without CDI) :
>>
>> @Stateless
>> public class AccountService {
>>
>> public Account get(*_at_NotNull* Account model) { }
>> }
>>
>>
>> As for Stateful bean the question is "is there a possible integration
>> between BV and EJB like JPA or JSF" ? For example, in the following code,
>> shall we automatically validate the bean on @Remove (like @PreRemove on
>> JPA) :
>>
>> @Stateful
>> public class ShoppingCart {
>>
>> *_at_NotNull*
>> private List<CartItem> cartItems;
>>
>> *_at_Remove*
>> public voide checkout { // validate cartItems ? }
>> }
>>
>> I don't really see the point in something like that, but I might miss
>> something. Could there be another possible integration ?
>>
>> Antonio
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 12:41 AM, Marina Vatkina <
>> marina.vatkina_at_oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Experts,
>>>
>>> As you know, EJB spec currently doesn't support Bean Validation. Do we
>>> want to change that?
>>>
>>> Let me know if you think that:
>>>
>>> a) BV should be supported for EJBs without CDI being enabled (probably
>>> with an opt-in flag to be backward compatible)
>>> b) BV should be supported for EJBs only if CDI is enabled
>>> c) there is no need for standardizing BV with respect to EJBs
>>> d) you don't care either way :(
>>>
>>>
>>> thanks,
>>> -marina
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
> Antonio Goncalves
> Software architect and Java Champion
>
> Web site <http://www.antoniogoncalves.org> | Twitter<http://twitter.com/agoncal>|
> LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/agoncal> | Paris JUG<http://www.parisjug.org> |
> Devoxx France <http://www.devoxx.fr>
>



-- 
Antonio Goncalves
Software architect and Java Champion
Web site <http://www.antoniogoncalves.org> |
Twitter<http://twitter.com/agoncal>|
LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/agoncal> | Paris
JUG<http://www.parisjug.org> |
Devoxx France <http://www.devoxx.fr>