Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [aspectj-dev] if (false) pointcut and the empty set 
What about providing syntactic sugar and making empty() be the name for the empty pointcut?

Separately, I think the if(false) request is an optimization. There's a good analogy in Java itself; writing if(false) statement; is almost equivalent to writing nothing too. However, it too imposes some additional constraints on the code that will be optimized away, e.g.,
if(false) throw new UndeclaredCheckedException("this will be a compiler error");

Ron Bodkin
Chief Technology Officer
New Aspects of Security
m: (415) 509-2895

> ------------Original Message-------------
> From: Jim Hugunin <lists@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: aspectj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Fri, Sep-5-2003 8:55 AM
> Subject: Re: [aspectj-dev] if (false) pointcut and the empty set
> 
> AspectJ has a mechanism for specifying that a pointcut matches nothing. 
>   You specify no body at all, i.e.
>     pointcut pc();
> 
> There have been complaints that this is confusing to people because it 
> looks too much like an abstract pointcut declaration.  For 1.2, we will 
> consider providing a guarantee that if(false) will always be optimized 
> away as matching nothing; however, I'm always concerned about having two 
> roughly equivalent ways of saying the same thing in a programming language.
> 
> -Jim
> 
> 
> Dean Wampler wrote:
> > I don't understand the internals of ajc, but the error messages also 
> > indicate to me that "if (false)" still results in some sort of 
> > evaluation at all join points and hence it still imposes a lot of 
> > overhead during the build. True? If so, a way to really turn it off 
> > "completely" would be nice (or some sort of alternative mechanism  ....)
> > 
> > dean
> > 
> > Macneil Shonle wrote:
> > 
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> This is a minor feature request, but something I'd like to see. Sometimes
> >> I want to disable a pointcut in my development (essentially commenting it
> >> out). I used to do this by making the pointcut be "if (false)" but this
> >> creates errors for after advice when expection handlers are present:
> >>
> >> <...>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Macneil
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> aspectj-dev mailing list
> aspectj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-dev
>

Back to the top