RE: [aspectj-dev] Extended pointcut definitions with metadata for Tiger

[Eric Bodden <eric@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks for the answer, Adrian.

Adrian Colyer wrote:

> I'm always interested in user input on how folks would like
> annotation matching to work in the language.... 

Personally, I think it would be most consistent, if one would treat
annotations just like a kind of second method signature, meaning, where we
match at the moment on...
<Modifiers><PackageFragment><TypeName><MethodName>(<Args>)<Exceptions>
...
I think the most consistent way would be an enhancement such as
@<AttPackageFragment><AttTypeName>(<AttArgs>)
<Modifiers><PackageFragment><TypeName><MethodName>(<Args>)<Exceptions>

I would propose to expose state from the attribute arguments "as usual". At
the moment I cannot think about any problem that could make.

Eric

-- 
Eric Bodden
RWTH Aachen University