| Qualifiers and Scoping annotations have different semantic meanings and a single |
| annotation should not be both a qualifier and a scoping annotation. |
| |
| If an annotation is both a scoping annotation and a qualifier, unless great care |
| is taken with its application and usage, the semantics of objects annotated with |
| the annotation are unclear. |
| |
| Take a look at this example: |
| |
| ```java |
| @Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME) |
| @Scope |
| @Qualifier |
| @interface DayScoped {} |
| |
| static class Allowance {} |
| static class DailyAllowance extends Allowance {} |
| static class Spender { |
| @Inject |
| Spender(Allowance allowance) {} |
| } |
| |
| static class BindingModule extends AbstractModule { |
| ... |
| @Provides |
| @DayScoped |
| Allowance providesAllowance() { |
| return new DailyAllowance(); |
| } |
| } |
| ``` |
| |
| Here, the `Allowance` instance used by Spender isn't actually scoped to a single |
| day, as the `@Provides` method applies the `DayScoped` scoping only to the |
| `@DayScoped Allowance`. Instead, the default constructor of `Allowance` is used |
| to create a new instance every time a `Spender` is created. |
| |
| If `@DayScope` wasn't a `Qualifier`, the provider method would do the right |
| thing: the un-annotated `Allowance` binding would be scoped to `DayScope`, |
| implemented by a single `DailyAllowance` instance per day. |