It should take parameters because otherwise I have to code my own annotations. See, it is more effort to write own annotations compared to just add a parameter. And it is more work to write @Inject @*Param compared to just writing @*Param. I understand and love standards, but here it clearly leads to lengthy code compared to the current situation.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marek Potociar [mailto:marek.potociar_at_oracle.com]
> Sent: Dienstag, 13. September 2011 10:18
> To: jsr339-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net
> Subject: [jsr339-experts] Re: HEADS-UP: JSR330 integration proposal
>
> I do see an advantage in cases where people use JAX-RS and a DI
> framework, which happens quite often. Reading the code
> where @Context and @Inject are interleaved makes me dizzy.
>
> Btw. I am not sure I understand why should @Inject take parameters. You
> can define your own qualifier annotations that
> take params, such as the standard @Named annotation (or JAX-RS @*Param
> which can be converted into qualifiers).
>
> Marek
>
> On 09/12/2011 07:25 PM, Markus KARG wrote:
> > Don't get me wrong. I understand the intension and like standards. I
> just wanted to say that it gives no actual benefit as long as @*Param
> becomes @Inject @*Param, you know? The solution obviously is that
> @Inject must have parameters, which DI does not offer so far.
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Marek Potociar [mailto:marek.potociar_at_oracle.com]
> >> Sent: Montag, 12. September 2011 09:26
> >> To: jsr339-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net
> >> Subject: [jsr339-experts] Re: HEADS-UP: JSR330 integration proposal
> >>
> >> Limited or not, it's a standard way of injecting things in Java. The
> >> idea is to make it default and deprecate @Context
> >> over time.
> >>
> >> Marek
> >>
> >> On 09/11/2011 05:14 PM, Markus KARG wrote:
> >>> Due to the limitations of the DI API I actually do not see any
> >> benefit of supporting DI in JAX-RS at all. I understand that it
> would
> >> be great to have only one common DI API for all Java EE bean types,
> but
> >> it makes no sense in the current limited state.
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Marek Potociar [mailto:marek.potociar_at_oracle.com]
> >>>> Sent: Dienstag, 6. September 2011 18:25
> >>>> To: jsr339-experts_at_jax-rs-spec.java.net
> >>>> Subject: [jsr339-experts] HEADS-UP: JSR330 integration proposal
> >>>>
> >>>> Hello experts,
> >>>> please review the proposal available on our project wiki and send
> >> your
> >>>> feedback:
> >>>>
> >>>> http://java.net/projects/jax-rs-spec/pages/DI
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you,
> >>>> Marek
> >>>
> >