I would prefer to make it not generic. (Alas we can't do the same for MBR/MBW...)
Marek
On 02/01/2012 04:38 PM, Santiago Pericas-Geertsen wrote:
>
> On Feb 1, 2012, at 10:17 AM, Bill Burke wrote:
>
>> Is the generic type supposed to be used for matching purposes? i.e. if you have
>>
>> ReaderInterceptor<Widget>
>>
>> that interceptor will only be applied to that type?
>
> No, that was never the intent. I think we've been going back and forth on the use of generics in the interceptors. What is your preference?
>
> -- Santiago
>
>> Not good, IMO, as you would need to recalcuate interceptors chains per-request (on the client) and per-response (on the server). Is there really an existing usecase on why we need this?
>>
>> If you want to go this route, IMO, Reader/WriterInterceptor should have a isReadable()/isWritable() method just like MessageBodyReader/Writer has. Also you should be allowed to have @Produces/_at_Consumes which would effect binding as well.
>>
>> --
>> Bill Burke
>> JBoss, a division of Red Hat
>> http://bill.burkecentral.com
>