jsr339-experts@jax-rs-spec.java.net

[jsr339-experts] Re: [jax-rs-spec users] Re: Not a big fan of @NameBinding, remove it?

From: Marek Potociar <marek.potociar_at_oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 18:18:02 +0100

On Feb 20, 2013, at 4:27 PM, Sergey Beryozkin <sberyozkin_at_talend.com> wrote:

> On 20/02/13 15:15, Bill Burke wrote:
>> Bloating the spec for very narrow use cases is generally not a good
>> idea, but whatever Marek. I can't wait to not have to argue with you
>> anymore... :) I won't submit any comments anymore since, it seems, the
>> spec is closed. You might as well just dissolve the expert group.
>>
>> And I don't apologize at all for submitting a flurry of minor
>> suggestions and removal requests. I've been spending the past year
>> implementing JAX-RS 2.0, now I'm focused on documenting it (through my
>> book). You see things very differently when writing about an API.
>>
> Should we start celebrating the arrival of PFD instead :-) ? The fact NameBinding can not handle MaxAge(N) is definitely a minor issue IMHO

Yup :) The 2.0-rc1 has been just released and now is waiting for a sync-up to maven central.

Marek

>
> Cheers, Sergey
>
>> On 2/20/2013 8:50 AM, Marek Potociar wrote:
>>> I can only repeat myself. We're past the point of removing and adding
>>> pieces of API just because you are "not a big fan" of them. This API
>>> has been discussed at length and often offers a simple and nice way
>>> for binding providers.
>>>
>>> Marek
>>>
>>> On Feb 20, 2013, at 12:03 AM, Bill Burke <bburke_at_redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> If your annotation has a qualifier, then @NameBinding really isn't a
>>>> very efficient pattern to implement a filter or interceptor. For
>>>> example, let's say you had a @MaxAge annotation that triggered adding
>>>> a Cache-Control header with a qualified max-age:
>>>>
>>>> @MaxAge(100)
>>>> @GET
>>>> public String get() {...}
>>>>
>>>> The @NameBinding filter would have to inject ResourceInfo and look up
>>>> the @MaxAge annotation each and ever request to set the value. It is
>>>> much better to implement a DynamicFeature in this case so you can
>>>> pre-initialize the filter with the annotation's value.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Bill Burke
>>>> JBoss, a division of Red Hat
>>>> http://bill.burkecentral.com
>>>
>>
>
>