On 2/1/12 12:58 PM, Marek Potociar wrote:
> Not sure I follow. What is the purpose of isReadable/isWritable then?
>
AFAIR, the matching algorithm first calls isReadable, which can return
multiple matches. ANd then from those multiple matches pick the best one.
> Marek
>
> On 02/01/2012 06:20 PM, Bill Burke wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2/1/12 12:17 PM, Marek Potociar wrote:
>>> I would prefer to make it not generic. (Alas we can't do the same for MBR/MBW...)
>>>
>>
>> well, it makes sense on MBR/MBW cuz the generic type could be used to break ties when matching.
>>
>>
>>> 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
>>>>
>>
--
Bill Burke
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
http://bill.burkecentral.com