Re: [aspectj-users] One target for intertype declarations

[Nicholas Lesiecki <ndlesiecki@xxxxxxxxx>]

> Whoops, sorry, missed the modifier. Of course you are right. I also
> consider that as a possible place for improvement.

Actually, there would be two copies of the field even if the modifier 
were "public". Variables, unlike methods, are not overridden. They can 
be shadowed, but you can still access both copies on a given object.

Cheers,

Nicholas Lesiecki
Software Craftsman, specializing in J2EE,
Agile Methods, and aspect-oriented programming
m: 520 591-1849

Books:
* Mastering AspectJ: http://tinyurl.com/66vf
* Java Tools for Extreme Programming: http://tinyurl.com/66vt

Articles on AspectJ:
* http://tinyurl.com/66vu and http://tinyurl.com/66vv
On Nov 23, 2004, at 4:17 PM, Eric Bodden wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> David Pearce wrote:
> > Hi Erik,
> >
> > > So in a nutshell you don't have two fields but two declarations of
> > > one
> > > and the same field. (If the field had been static that would have
> > > been
> > > a different thing)
> >
> > Ok, I am getting confused now.  You seem to be saying that although
> > we have two declarations of the field there will actually only be
> > copy of it in test2.  Even though it's declared private in both
> > test and test2?
> Whoops, sorry, missed the modifier. Of course you are right. I also
> consider that as a possible place for improvement.
>
> Eric
>
> - --
> Eric Bodden
> Chair I2 for Programming Languages and Program Analysis
> RWTH Aachen University
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGP 8.0.3
>
> iQA/AwUBQaPFIMwiFCm7RlWCEQLf7QCgvAJl6i/r26bMUhgfEnAebx1hkwsAnjB8
> hTkm5buuYQHoYBxSCP4V5CMv
> =DLTg
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aspectj-users mailing list
> aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users