Re: [aspectj-users] ITD syntax

[Ichthyostega <prg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi Dave,

> I'm glad for this discussion because it's helped me in refining how I think 
> this would work best.
Same here. I saw your answer just after posting mine.
Probably we are facing a decision on two possible routes to take:

- - provide some convenience for Delegation using AspectJ
- - stick to the ITD semantics but provide a better syntax.

My feeling is we would be best off if we took a clear decision on
one of those routes and don't try to mix them up. Even if we were
able to come with a combined solution, it will confuse people.

Thus, if we go the "Delegation" route, "this" should be really rebound
the moment we are within the scope of the delegate to mean the delegate,
the same way as if all of this was just implemented in plain Java.
OTOH, when going the "ITD" route, the source class (ITDDefaultImpl
or DoSomethingImpl) is rather sort-of a template for code woven into
the target. I.e., at runtime, no class DoSomethingImpl will be loaded.
Then the question remains what should happen with private fields.
Consider, both the class Doer and class DoSomethingImpl may use
a private field with the same name for their implementation.

Hermann





-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFJOE6wZbZrB6HelLIRAjRcAJ9lpaNl/nFsSX/dTl34LL364s5qyQCfQ8wS
CmLlX5bTe+LvoI6V8sh29K8=
=EYAe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----