[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
RE: [aspectj-users] It was related to inheritance and deprecatedmethods ...
|
Glen,
One way I can think of is to use declare warning [or declare error] to capture all those places where a deprecate class is used and have the compiler spit out a message when it finds its usage. Maybe something like the following taken from the Quick Reference guide [http://www.eclipse.org/aspectj/doc/released/quick5.pdf]:
declare warning : call(Priority.new(..)) : "bad construction of Priority object. Deprecated usage, please use Level" ;
Ron
________________________________
From: aspectj-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Glenn Farrow
Sent: Wed 9/20/2006 7:33 AM
To: aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [aspectj-users] It was related to inheritance and deprecatedmethods ...
Ya as per my previous email I understand that it wasn't matching because the method signature for the log method specifies a Priority for the first parameter, even though that class is deprecated. My point was that Aspectj should match based on the type of the parameter actually being passed (which is a Level). The run time type of that parameter must be preserved in the byte code as a Level.
What if, for example to catch uses of a deprecated class, I wanted to differentiate between calls to log() that were passing in a Priority and calls that were passing in a Level? I would have no way to do this if matching is based on the method signature and not the actual parameter types passed.
Matthew Webster wrote:
Glenn,
The first pointcut does not match because the call() PCD does not match. You have asked to match a method that takes Level as the first parameter while the method you are calling takes a Category. The match takes place at compile- not run-time. Your other pointcuts match with a run-time test because you are matching and binding with the args() PCD. They will also match the call below but the advice will not be invoked at run-time because the first argument is a Category and not a Level:
logger.log(Priority.FATAL,"");
The following pointcut will always match without a runtime test:
pointcut logCall() : target(Logger) && !within(LoggingAspect) && call(void log(Priority, ..));
Matthew Webster
AOSD Project
Java Technology Centre, MP146
IBM Hursley Park, Winchester, SO21 2JN, England
Telephone: +44 196 2816139 (external) 246139 (internal)
Email: Matthew Webster/UK/IBM @ IBMGB, matthew_webster@xxxxxxxxxx
http://w3.hursley.ibm.com/~websterm/
Glenn Farrow <glenn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:glenn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: aspectj-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
19/09/2006 16:50
Please respond to
glenn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Please respond to
aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
To
Matthew Webster/UK/IBM@IBMGB
cc
aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject
[aspectj-users] It was related to inheritance and deprecated methods ...
although I believe it should still work with Level.
Here is the log4j method declaration:
public void log(Priority p, Object message);
however Priority is deprecated so you are supposed to pass in a Level (which implements Priority).
Here is my method call:
_logger.log(Level.ERROR, "My error message");
The following pointcut does NOT match:
pointcut logCall(Level p) : target(Logger) && args(p, ..) && !within(LoggingAspect) && call(void log(Level, ..));
The following pointcuts DO match:
pointcut logCall(Level p) : target(Logger) && args(p, ..) && !within(LoggingAspect) && call(void log(..));
pointcut logCall(Level p) : target(Logger) && args(p, ..) && !within(LoggingAspect) && call(void log(Priority p, ..));
pointcut logCall(Level p) : target(Logger) && args(p, ..) && !within(LoggingAspect) && call(void log(Priority+ p, ..));
So even though I am passing in a Level in my method call, the fact that the method is defined to accept a (deprecated) Priority prevents the first pointcut from matching?
Also can anyone explain why the 3 pointcuts that do match all require a runtime test?
Glenn
Matthew Webster wrote:
Glenn,
Unfortunately pointcuts not matching is one of the hardest things to diagnose. Could you post you whole aspect (or as much of it as you are willing to disclose) and a full example of a join point you are trying to match. Also could you give some examples of your environment e.g. AJDT, Ant or load-time weaving.
Cheers
Matthew Webster
AOSD Project
Java Technology Centre, MP146
IBM Hursley Park, Winchester, SO21 2JN, England
Telephone: +44 196 2816139 (external) 246139 (internal)
Email: Matthew Webster/UK/IBM @ IBMGB, matthew_webster@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:matthew_webster@xxxxxxxxxx>
http://w3.hursley.ibm.com/~websterm/ <http://w3.hursley.ibm.com/%7Ewebsterm/%06quot;>
Glenn Farrow <glenn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:glenn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: aspectj-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:aspectj-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
19/09/2006 15:43
Please respond to
glenn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:glenn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> ; Please respond to
aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To
Ron Bodkin <rbodkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:rbodkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject
Re: [aspectj-users] Pointcut fails to match when arguments combinedwith ".."
No, tried that too previously. Same result.
Ron Bodkin wrote:
> I think you want args(p, ..) to match any number of arguments as long as the
> first one is a Level; args(p) will match exactly one argument of type Level.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: aspectj-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:aspectj-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> [mailto:aspectj-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:aspectj-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> ] On Behalf Of Glenn Farrow
> Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 6:33 AM
> To: aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [aspectj-users] Pointcut fails to match when arguments combinedwith
> ".."
>
> Observer the following pointcut and advice which is supposed to match
> all calls to Logger.log(..). Logger.log always takes a Level as the
> first parameter. However the advice never gets applied.
>
> pointcut logCall(Level p) : target(Logger) && args(p) &&
> !within(LoggingAspect) && call(void log(..));
> before(Level p) : logCall(p) {
> Errors.add(p);
> }
>
> If I revise the pointcut and advice as follows it does get applied.
> AspectJ seems to be getting confused when trying to use arguments and
> specifying additional optional arguments using wildcards.
>
> pointcut logCall() : target(Logger) && !within(LoggingAspect) &&
> call(void(log(..));
> before() : logCall() {
> dummy();
> }
>
> What's the scoop? I've also tried the following and it doesn't match
> either:
>
> pointcut logCall(Level p) : target(Logger) && args(p) &&
> !within(LoggingAspect) && call(void log(Level, ..));
> before(Level p) : logCall(p) {
> Errors.add(p);
> }
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aspectj-users mailing list
> aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users>
>
>
_______________________________________________
aspectj-users mailing list
aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users>
_______________________________________________
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
<<winmail.dat>>