[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [aspectj-users] Status of using XML config, as opposed to language-based annotations?
- From: "Ted Neward" <ted@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 00:52:02 -0700
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Thread-index: AcVB26Js7khP95qES9m8FrDP2RmeSABRofow
Let me suggest that one of the strengths of AspectJ (as opposed to other
AOP-ish tools) is that it in fact does everything inside the language, as
opposed to external files like XML configuration files. One of the reasons
JSR 175 was formed was to do away with "external" code-like artifacts, like
deployment descriptors, and I'd hate to see us go back to a mechanism that
forces developers to keep code-like entities in two places at once.
Author, Instructor, Consultant
Java, .NET, Web services
> -----Original Message-----
> From: aspectj-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:aspectj-users-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Karr, David
> Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 9:53 AM
> To: aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [aspectj-users] Status of using XML config,as opposed to
> language-based annotations?
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe one of the basic differences
> between Aspectwerkz and AspectJ is that the former uses an XML file for
> configuring the pointcuts and aspects, but the latter uses
> language-based annotations for specifying the pointcuts. I believe the
> fact that Aspectwerkz uses an XML file for pointcut specifications helps
> to facilitate its ability to do load-time weaving of third-party libs.
> As AspectJ moves forward with integrating features of Aspectwerkz, will
> it have the ability to specify the aspect integration entirely in an XML
> file, without requiring language extensions? I'm hoping I can add
> aspects to pointcuts using pure Java code. Will this be feasible with
> the final AspectJ 5.0?
> aspectj-users mailing list