Bug 138398 - Make -outxml the default
Summary: Make -outxml the default
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: AspectJ
Classification: Tools
Component: Compiler (show other bugs)
Version: DEVELOPMENT   Edit
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P3 enhancement (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: aspectj inbox CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2006-04-25 11:18 EDT by Matthew Webster CLA
Modified: 2013-06-24 11:02 EDT (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Matthew Webster CLA 2006-04-25 11:18:08 EDT 
Now that -Xreweavable is the default applications that are built with aspects can be used for LTW. However unless the author includes an aop.xml file the following errors will occur due to the limitations described in bug 104218:

warning using unwoven version of 'org.eclipse.contribution.xref.ui.views.XReferenceView' due to exception: org.aspectj.bridge.AbortException: aspect 'org.eclipse.contribution.xref.internal.ui.ras.XRefUIFFDC' woven into 'org.eclipse.contribution.xref.ui.views.XReferenceView' must be declared in an aop.xml file.

While the message is designed to be helpful and any AbortException is normally caught by the LTW adaptor (Aj) the application may not behave correctly. We should therefore consider making the generation of an appropriate aop.xml file the default.
Comment 1 Matthew Webster CLA 2006-08-30 11:07:47 EDT 
Now that Bug 149289 "Support system and user aop.xml configuration files" ensures generated aop.xml files have a different name their is less chance of any negative impact.
Comment 2 Matthew Webster CLA 2006-08-30 12:08:50 EDT 
Numerous failures and even a termination running AjcHarnessTestsUsingJUnit (all due it seems to the unexpected presence of aop.xml) suggest we need a new option -NoOutxml or something like it.
Comment 3 Andrew Clement CLA 2007-10-24 09:50:17 EDT 
investigate what the failures actually are to determine why we aren't just doing this.
Comment 4 Andrew Clement CLA 2013-06-24 11:02:48 EDT 
unsetting the target field which is currently set for something already released