Re: [aspectj-users] Visibility of inter-type members with @DeclareMixin

[Andrew Eisenberg <andrew@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Matthew,

I don't think that's currently possible, so you should probably raise
an enhancement request for that.

However, I would like to know why this is so important to you.

These methods are synthetic and someone who wants to call them must
either look at the byte code or have knowledge about AspectJ.  In the
IDE, they are filtered from content assist.  And even if these methods
were made private, they could still be accessible via reflection.

I'm not entirely sure how security policies work, but I know they can
be used to restrict reflective access to fields.  Can they also be
used to restrict other kinds of access?

On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 1:13 PM, matthewadams12<matthew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I've noticed that introduced fields appear to be more public than I'd like.
>
> Consider the following code, all in package "intro.test":
>
> @Target(ElementType.TYPE)
> @Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
> public @interface HasBar {}
> =================
> @HasBar
> public class Foo {}
> =================
> public aspect HasBarIntro {
>
>        private interface HasBar {}
>
>        declare parents: (@intro.test.HasBar *) implements HasBar;
>
>        private String HasBar.bar;
>
>        public String HasBar.getBar() {
>                return bar;
>        }
>
>        public void HasBar.setBar(String bar) {
>                this.bar = bar;
>        }
> }
> =================
>
> After compiling, the introduced String "bar" appears as a public field on
> Foo.  When I run "javap -private intro.test.Foo", I get the following:
>
> Compiled from "Foo.java"
> public class intro.test.Foo extends java.lang.Object implements
> intro.test.HasBarIntro$HasBar{
>    public java.lang.String
> ajc$interField$intro_test_HasBarIntro$intro_test_HasBarIntro$HasBar$bar;
>    public intro.test.Foo();
>    public java.lang.String
> ajc$interFieldGet$intro_test_HasBarIntro$intro_test_HasBarIntro$HasBar$bar();
>    public void
> ajc$interFieldSet$intro_test_HasBarIntro$intro_test_HasBarIntro$HasBar$bar(java.lang.String);
>    public java.lang.String getBar();
>    public void setBar(java.lang.String);
> }
>
> Notice the first field, a public String field introduced by HasBarIntro.
> Why is the field public?  Is there a way for all of the members prefaced
> with "ajc$" to be non-public?
>
> I tried to ask this question once already:
> http://www.nabble.com/ITD-public-fields-break-encapsulation--ts25154702.html
>
> Thanks,
> Matthew
>
>
> Andrew Eisenberg wrote:
>>
>> If the interface used as the introduced parent is only accessible
>> inside the aspect (ie- it is private), then its methods should only be
>> accessible from within the aspect.  So, your strategy below should
>> work (however, I have not tried this out myself).
>>
>> 2009/8/31 João Gonçalves <jocolimonada@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>> Using the private keyword in the factory method (for @DeclareMixin) /
>>> field
>>> (for @DeclareParents)?
>>> That is:
>>>     @DeclareMixin("ClassName")
>>>     private static IFood create FoodImplementation() {
>>>         return new FoodImpl();
>>>     }
>>>
>>> and
>>>     @DeclareParents(value="ClassName",defaultImpl=FoodImpl.class)
>>>     private IFood food;
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks. Also, in the above examples, the visibility will be private, even
>>> if
>>> the interface/implementation class is public, right?
>> _______________________________________________
>> aspectj-users mailing list
>> aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
>>
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Visibility-of-inter-type-members-with-%40DeclareMixin-and-%40DeclareParents-tp25226224p25229677.html
> Sent from the AspectJ - users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> aspectj-users mailing list
> aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
>