RE: [aspectj-users] Intertype declarations and precedence

["Jon S. Baekken" <jbaekken@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Tha programming guide is not very thorough on this topic, but after my own
experimentation (with AspectJ 1.5)it seems like:

- if two aspects introduce the same member, and both are private, each
aspect will use its declared member, regardeless of the declared precedence

- if two aspects introduce the same member, one of which is private and one
of which is public, the aspect with the public declaration must have
precedence for the progrma to compile

- if two aspects introduce the same member, both of which are public, the
one with precedence will be used in all contexts

But as I understand Laddad's example, precedence will have an effect even
when both aspects introduce private members. I.e. we get the same result as
if both members were public.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: aspectj-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:aspectj-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Wes Isberg
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 8:09 PM
To: aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [aspectj-users] Intertype declarations and precedence


Conflicts are discussed in the AspectJ Programming Guide, semantics
appendix:

 
file:///c:/home/wes/dev/tools/aspectj-1.5/doc/progguide/printable.html#confl
icts

As you suggest, it says members not visible don't conflict.

Does that help?  Is the current compiler behaving otherwise?

Thanks - 
Wes

> ------------Original Message------------
> From: "Jon S. Baekken" <jbaekken@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Sun, Mar-19-2006 7:50 PM
> Subject: [aspectj-users] Intertype declarations and precedence
>
> Everyone,
> 
> In "AspectJ in Action", p. 120-122, Laddad discusses aspect precedence
> and
> member introductions, saying that if two aspects introduce the same 
> member,
> only the one from the dominating aspect will survive. However, I can't 
> see
> how this is right, because as far as I know,
> 
> - unless the member is declared private in all places, the program
> won't
> compile, 
> - when a member is declared private, it's only visible from inside that
> aspect, and
> - each aspect will just use its own private declaration.
> 
> In the example in the book, SecurityAspect has precedence over 
> TrackingAspect, but changing the precedence to the opposite has no 
> effect. SecurityAspect is still just using its own declarations.
> 
> So, is Laddad incorrect here, has this changed from the AspectJ 
> version
> he
> used, or am I just not getting the point?
> 
> Jon
> 
> http://www.eecs.wsu.edu/~jbaekken/
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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