Bug 44736

Summary: using == false in pointcuts confuses the compiler
Product: [Tools] AspectJ Reporter: attila lendvai <101>
Component: CompilerAssignee: Jim Hugunin <jim-aj>
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE QA Contact:
Severity: normal    
Priority: P3 CC: gharley
Version: 1.1.1   
Target Milestone: ---   
Hardware: PC   
OS: Windows XP   
Whiteboard:
Attachments:
Description Flags
file that confuses compiler none

Description attila lendvai CLA 2003-10-13 05:49:46 EDT
see example file
Comment 1 attila lendvai CLA 2003-10-13 05:52:21 EDT
Created attachment 6409 [details]
file that confuses compiler

     [iajc]
D:\work\granite\Repository\nvsr\src\web\java\com\netvisor\nvsr\web\Test.aj:6
Return type for the method is missing
     [iajc] execution(void A.foo()) &&
     [iajc] ^^^^^^^^^^
     [iajc]
D:\work\granite\Repository\nvsr\src\web\java\com\netvisor\nvsr\web\Test.aj:6
Syntax error on token ")", "{" expected
     [iajc] execution(void A.foo()) &&
     [iajc]			  ^
     [iajc]
D:\work\granite\Repository\nvsr\src\web\java\com\netvisor\nvsr\web\Test.aj:7
Unmatched bracket
     [iajc] cflowbelow(call(void A.bar())) == false
     [iajc]		   ^
     [iajc]
D:\work\granite\Repository\nvsr\src\web\java\com\netvisor\nvsr\web\Test.aj:7
Unmatched bracket
     [iajc] cflowbelow(call(void A.bar())) == false
     [iajc]				^
     [iajc]
D:\work\granite\Repository\nvsr\src\web\java\com\netvisor\nvsr\web\Test.aj:7
Syntax error on token ")", "{" expected
     [iajc] cflowbelow(call(void A.bar())) == false
     [iajc]				^
     [iajc]
D:\work\granite\Repository\nvsr\src\web\java\com\netvisor\nvsr\web\Test.aj:7
Unmatched bracket
     [iajc] cflowbelow(call(void A.bar())) == false
     [iajc]				 ^
     [iajc]
D:\work\granite\Repository\nvsr\src\web\java\com\netvisor\nvsr\web\Test.aj:7
Syntax error on token "==", "{" expected
     [iajc] cflowbelow(call(void A.bar())) == false
     [iajc]				   ^^

     [iajc] 7 errors

BUILD FAILED





changing == false to ! solves the problem
Comment 2 George Harley CLA 2003-10-16 10:13:27 EDT
Is this really an AspectJ bug ? It just looks like incorrect use of the 
language.
Comment 3 Jim Hugunin CLA 2004-01-07 04:37:58 EST
This is another case of the referenced enhancement request 42660 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 42660 ***