ArC - injection point validation

[mkouba]

• type variable is not a legal injection point type
• also validate type params of types related to programmatic lookup,
  i.e. Instance<> and List<> with All qualifier

[Ladicek]

LGTM, though I have reservations about the error messages. Wildcards and type variables are legal type arguments. IMHO, the errors should read more like "Injection point may not contain a wildcard type argument" or so.

Note I'm specifically using the term "type argument" instead of "type parameter". I'd encourage to follow this convention. In a function declaration, we define parameters. In a function call, we pass arguments. The same applies to generics. In a generic class/method declaration, we define type parameters (e.g. in class List<T> { ... }, T is a type parameter). In a generic instantiation of a class/method, we pass type arguments (e.g. in List<String>, String is a type argument).

[mkouba]

LGTM, though I have reservations about the error messages. Wildcards and type variables are legal type arguments. IMHO, the errors should read more like "Injection point may not contain a wildcard type argument" or so.

Actually, the error message for @Inject T is "Type variable is not a legal injection point type" which is IMO correct. "Injection point may not contain a wildcard type argument" is not exact because @Inject List<T> is OK.

Note I'm specifically using the term "type argument" instead of "type parameter".

Ok, I'll update the error message for Instance to use the "type argument".

[Ladicek]

Some tests assert an error message of "Type variable is not a legal injection point type", which is totally fine. Other tests assert an error message of "Type variable is not a legal type parameter", and that's what I'm objecting about.

[manovotn]

Looks good and consistent with what we do in Weld.

[mkouba]

I need to fix the io.quarkus.qute.deployment.inject.InjectionFailedTest...