RE: [aspectj-users] ajc not enforcing package - directory structure rule

["Jim Hugunin" <lists@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree with both of you that this feature of javac can be annoying.  I
can never bring myself to write the code to enforce this rule (so ajc
doesn't).  However, we've gotten our fair share of bug reports
complaining about legal behavior that was different from javac's.  We
usually wind up "fixing" these in acknowledgement of javac's position as
a de-facto standard.

This rule combined with the rule that externally visible classes must be
in a file named ClassName.java makes it easy for compilers to find the
correct source file for a given class name without doing any parsing.
This is very useful for javac's dependency-based compilation where you
can point it at Main.java and have all dependencies compiled
automatically.  It can also make implementing incremental compilation
easier.

In AspectJ-1.2, we should add a -warn:packageMatchesDirectory option to
go along with eclipse's other warning options like the one for unused
local variables.  I'm afraid that the default behavior will probably be
to match javac following the principle of least surprise.  However, I'm
almost certain that this will be an option that can be disabled for
those who find the rule silly.

-Jim

BTW - I've been exploring the csharp language and MS's tools are much
more flexible about the relationship between file structure and
namespaces.  I've found this to be very helpful in the early stages of a
project where I often want all of my classes in a single file.  However,
I've found that as a project grows I will break it up into the one class
per file and one directory per package structure enforced by javac.
This is made easier by csharp's 'internal' modifier that roughly
corresponds to "within my .jar file" rather than within my package.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: aspectj-users-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:aspectj-users-
> admin@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Lendvai Attila
> Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2003 2:52 AM
> To: aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [aspectj-users] ajc not enforcing package - directory
> structure rule
> 
> :: > is it a feature or a bug that ajc does not complain if a
> :: > file is not in
> :: > a directory structure what it's package name defines?
> ::
> :: Feature in my view . There's no requirement that source
> :: files be stored in the same directory structure as their
> :: packages define. I find it very annoying when IDE's require this.
> 
> i kinda like it, too. btw, javac itself is the one who complains, not
> only the ide's.
> 
> i would just like to know wether this feature will remain or will be
> fixed, so i can have my long term package strategy...
> 
> i like package private stuff, but on the other hand i don't like
> directories with houdreds of files.
> 
> 101
> _______________________________________________
> aspectj-users mailing list
> aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users