[aspectj-users] UML tools' tolerance for AspectJ code

["Antti Karanta" <antti.karanta@xxxxxxx>]

                   Hi!

  As far as I know, there is no "official" way of visualizing aspects
with UML (though I did find some papers on proposed aspectj uml notation
with google). I also assume that no UML tool provides support for Aspect
syntax. Please do correct me if I am wrong with either of these.
  Are any of the UML tool vendors thinking of supporting AspectJ in some
way?


  I am currently evaluating UML tools to use in my project. I also want
to be able to use AspectJ. As it is presently somewhat useless to look
for AspectJ support in these tools I'll settle for less. So what I'd
like to know is how well different UML tools, specifically the ones with
roundtrip engineering, tolerate AspectJ syntax. Anyone have any
experience on the matter?
  Here's a few concerns that come to mind:

- UML tool tolerating classes with inner aspects, i.e. showing the other
members correctly in class diagrams
- UML tool tolerating .java files that contain only aspect(s)
- UML tool tolerating .java class file that, in addition to a
class/interface, has an aspect (not an inner one, but a normal one with
package visibility)
- If the UML tool integrates into Eclipse, does it function properly
with AJDT? Again, I'm not asking for integration but simply that both
still work.

  What I mean by tolerating here is that the UML tool at most gives a
warning message in the above cases when parsing the source, but
otherwise functions normally in its class roundtrip / reverse
engineering. 


  You may also bring up other relevant things I may not have thought of.



       -Antti-