[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [aspectj-users] @AJ or conventional syntax?
- From: Eduardo Rocha <eduardorochabr@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 11:22:50 -0200
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=pASzC/j+zfJSav80hQbH28mfhmnOiAfrl0etgF/4D8w9qQpOD8mCU8YroWza/H8lbryQNA2Q380LifwT2Kp/gVGhfH48ncAKtYrI1+UxoMbvj9n9tMQnBpdCOta/bto81iAmYHpDVexNMnFpw7L1o1vGzpKMkI3fUfB27x78moI=
Currently, AspectJ editor is not as "smart" as Java Editor (see
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=111971 for example), are
people struggling with this, or it's OK? I really hope this can be
fixed for 1.5.0 final :)
2005/11/21, Rafal Krzewski <Rafal.Krzewski@xxxxxxxxx>:
> Eduardo Rocha wrote:
> > I would like to know if people are willing to move to @AJ syntax when
> > possible, or prefer to continue with traditional syntax even when
> > dealing with Java 5.
> > Which one do people find better for reading?
> > A major drawback I see with @AJ syntax is that it doesn't allow me to
> > navigate through the marked join points (in Eclipse).
> Definetely traditional AJ syntax. I may be wrong I don't see much
> purpose in @AJ syntax except for people migrating existing applications
> from AspectWerks.
> Maybe if would be also beneficial for people that cannot use AJDT for
> some reason, but have Java5 enabled IDE?
> my .02
> aspectj-users mailing list