[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
RE: [aspectj-users] Status of using XML config, as opposed to language-based annotations?

There will be two ways in AspectJ 5 to support pure-java aspects: using 
@AspectJ-style aspects (in annotations) and using XML configuration of 
abstract aspects.  

@AspectJ-style aspects will look a lot like AspectWerkz code now, with
minor differences to align the semantics with AspectJ.

AspectJ 5, aside from generally supporting AspectWerkz, will introduce 
a limited form of configuration permitting binary abstract aspects to be 
concretized via XML.  This seems like the right approach in situations 
where there is separation between the roles of the aspect-writer 
and the aspect-deployer, and the "native language" of the application 
deployer is as much XML as it is Java.  However, the IDE support does not
yet extend to the XML files (and runtime configuration means runtime errors), 
so there's still significant advantage to working within the programming 
language: to get one view of the crosscutting in the entire program.

For more details on the AspectWerkz integration, see the AspectJ 5
Developer's notebook, esp. "Configuring Load-time Weaving with aop.xml files":


> ------------Original Message------------
> From: "Ted Neward" <ted@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Sun, Apr-17-2005 0:51 AM
> Subject: RE: [aspectj-users] Status of using XML config, as opposed to language-based annotations?
> 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.
> Ted Neward
> Author, Instructor, Consultant
> Java, .NET, Web services
> http://www.neward.net/ted
> > -----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 
> > 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
> > aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
> _______________________________________________
> aspectj-users mailing list
> aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users