[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: [aspectj-dev] 1.1 Compiler differences
|
Not resolving ../../ paths in .lst files was a bug that I think Mik fixed.
Wes
"DiFrango, Ron" wrote:
> All,
>
> I found an even more interesting (and more problematic for me) twist on this
> subject. In my current listing files, if the files affect only lived in
> that package, then we did not fully list out the package names. So for
> example consider the following structure:
>
> com
> ronmar
> aop
> ExceptionHandlingGlobalAspect.aj
> global.lst
> test1
> test1.lst
> MyAspect1.aj
> AfectedByAsect1_ONLY.java
> test2
> test2.lst
> MyAspect2.aj
> AfectedByAsect2_ONLY.java
>
> The listing files in test1 and test2 would look like the following:
>
> test1.lst
> MyAspect1.aj
> AfectedByAsect1_ONLY.java
>
> test2.lst
> MyAspect2.aj
> AfectedByAsect2_ONLY.java
>
> The global.lst would look like the following:
>
> ExceptionHandlingGlobalAspect.aj
> @../test1/test1.lst
> @../test2/test2.lst
>
> Under 1.0 this worked fine, I guess when it "resolved" the contests of
> test1.lst and test2.lst it "pre-pended" if you will the package/src
> structure for you. Under 1.1 it no longer does this.
>
> I guess I will have to fix this as well. I am not sure if was bad behavior
> on my part in past versions or some fundamental change in 1.1.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ron DiFrango
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: DiFrango, Ron
> Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 4:15 PM
> To: 'aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx'
> Cc: 'aspectj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx'
> Subject: [aspectj-dev] 1.1 Compiler differences
>
> All,
>
> When I was upgrading to aspectj to 1.1, I found an interesting compiler
> difference. We have multiple listing files that get include in one where
> each listing file contained the aspect to be applied and the source files
> that they affected. What this lead to (and that I did not realize this
> until the upgrade) is that some files had duplicate listings. Under the 1.0
> compiler it handled this okay, but under 1.1 it complains about multiple
> definitions.
>
> My question is was this a conscious decision or some un-intended side
> effect?
>
> In the meantime, I am looking at some sort of mechanism in ant to truly
> combine my files into one listing file and run a custom sort task we already
> have in place to ensure that there are no duplicates.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ron DiFrango
>
> **************************************************************************
> The information transmitted herewith is sensitive information intended only
> for use by the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If the reader
> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
> any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, copying or other
> use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information is
> strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
> please contact the sender and delete the material from your computer.
> _______________________________________________
> aspectj-dev mailing list
> aspectj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-dev
>
> **************************************************************************
> The information transmitted herewith is sensitive information intended only
> for use by the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If the reader
> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
> any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, copying or other
> use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information is
> strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
> please contact the sender and delete the material from your computer.
> _______________________________________________
> aspectj-dev mailing list
> aspectj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-dev