Re: [aspectj-dev] New intertype syntax ...new meaning?

[Andy Clement <andrew.clement@xxxxxxxxx>]

I suspected AJDT may be removing them when it can, but on which of
these does it base the decision to remove:

- name
- model
- metadata

if (1) it may need changing to (2) or (3) if I alter the naming
scheme.  But we knew there would be an impact on AJDT if this mangling
change goes ahead.

Andy

2009/11/26 Andrew Eisenberg <andrew@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 9:54 PM, Andrew Eisenberg <andrew@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> This does mean that today any java projects consuming the
>>> type may well see ajc$blahblah as a horrid code completion suggestion
>>> if working with instances of that type - so in some respects, changing
>>> it to properly private is a good thing to do anyway...)
>>
>> Small point here... AJDT filters out all of these kinds of proposals,
>> so you you should never see them.
>>
> Let me rephrase that slightly...it is possible to see them if you are
> consuming an aspect from another project in a non-AJ project.
> _______________________________________________
> aspectj-dev mailing list
> aspectj-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-dev
>