[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
|
Re: [aspectj-users] AW: Pointcut on a constructor withacustom@Annotation
|
- From: "Andy Clement" <andrew.clement@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 08:11:54 +0100
- Delivered-to: aspectj-users@eclipse.org
- 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=SPL3ZPduQ30oaQ/6TVWn9zaoSqT+a42Pm6QhZJfC5QrnH/sfYE5b8zH7X8uGLVOexD0zbVDUqmLpj9o4AkDzUhtvBCP+WjTEkw4EaANAclUFZx7KFcJkn7Sy4qu8qklHP/H0iDOA4WEcZW2DT4TA2hvoAF3ufYVSEmhX3v/PMVg=
> I'd expect the @target form in the advice to match the construction of C in
> this example, but it appears that the rule is based on whether the
> annotation is on the most derived class and not whether the type has an
> annotation on one of its runtime types.
Annotations are inherited if you put @Inherited on them.
Making the annotation inherited ensures @target matches:
C:\aspectj1.5.1a>java AnnotatedCtor
I new exec with @target AnnotatedBase@750159
I new exec with @target C@18a7efd
I new exec with @target C@18a7efd
Also Ramnivas raised a bug a while ago on some problems with '+' when
annotations are in the mix:
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=128664
- Andy.