Community
Participate
Working Groups
See discussion on email list: http://www.nabble.com/A-little-pointcut-help-please-to25807470.html That discussion boils down to the ability for declare error to allow for more statically determined conditions, for example: if(!thisEnclosingJoinPoint.getPackage().equals(thisJoinPoint.getPackage()))
see if there is time in 1.6.7 to do anything
I'm looking here at what we could do for static analysis. There are two options: 1) dynamically load the code generated for the if after determining all references within it can be satisfied statically, and execute it. We would have to conjure up the tjpsp/tejpsp to pass to it. 2) hard code for the common patterns in the if(). Basically converting the Java Ast to a much more simple Ast for a mini-language that we would allow. This could then be evaluated directly without loading anything dynamically. I am leaning towards option (2) because it feels easier and I don't like directly executing code I'm compiling as part of the compilation/weaving process. For option (2), support would be provided for: constants: primitives plus string operators: ! && || == != .equals() entities: thisJoinPointStaticPart/thisEnclosingJoinPointStaticPart the example in the raise request isn't actually valid as there is no getPackage() method on thisJoinPoint. Instead it would be: thisJoinPoint.getSignature().getDeclaringType().getPackage() that suggests we want support for no-arg method invocations. Putting all that together would be enough to do some interesting stuff, but I really don't know if it is sufficient. Think I'll ask on the mailing list for more input on what users would like to say in a deow if.
Hey guys, target milestone on this says 1.7.0 (as of 2012/10/1). Any chance to get this into the schedule?
yes, I haven't done the 'move' yet for 1.7.0 issues > 1.7.2, I might do that today. If an issue has some kind of target then it is a candidate for getting worked on (if you don't have a target, it *really* isn't high on the priority list) This feature is a bunch of work, however, so I'm really not sure when we'll find some time. This would be a good little self contained project for a student or someone interested in getting to grips with AJ, maybe we can find someone.
Any change on this issue?
not yet.
unsetting the target field which is currently set for something already released
