Community
Participate
Working Groups
Semantics notes: "Because advice only applies from concrete aspects, the declare precedence form only matters when declaring precedence with concrete aspects." The compiler should emit an error when it encounters an abstract aspect in a declare precedence statement, perhaps with the suggestion about using T+ for subaspects. There's no good reason for the developer to be saying this, so it need not be an XLint message. This error will catch (a) developers who don't know this rule; (b) developers who know but forget (cf "args(T)"); and (c) developers who generalize an aspect from concrete to abstract without updating corresponding clients. I suppose the same goes for a class, unless we redefine declare precedence to include any aspects enclosed in the class. We probably don't want an XLint warning if a pattern picks out both valid concrete aspects and invalid classes or aspects, because it would trip on T+ or com.company..* way too often.
