Re: [aspectj-users] Puzzling problem using AspectJ

[Abhijit Inamdar <Ainamdar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks for your response Andy.  
This is not a singleton aspect.  It is actually percflow(myop()) { ... where myop() is another pointcut.

Here is a snippet of the woven output around a log statement("Entering isValidRequest" in this case):  

   76:  invokestatic    #367; //Method org/aspectj/runtime/reflect/Factory.makeJP:(Lorg/aspectj/lang/JoinPoint$StaticPart;Ljava/lang/Object;Ljava/lang/Object;)Lorg/aspectj/lang/JoinPoint;
   79:  getstatic       #379; //Field ajc$tjp_4:Lorg/aspectj/lang/JoinPoint$EnclosingStaticPart;
   82:  invokevirtual   #355; //Method com/mycompany/myapp/aspects/tracing/myAspect.ajc$before$com_mycompany_myapp_aspects_tracing_myAspect$4$48864b4c:(Lorg/aspectj/lang/JoinPoint;Lorg/aspectj/lang/JoinPoint$StaticPart;)V
   85:  getstatic       #34; //Field logger:Lorg/apache/log4j/Logger;
   88:  ldc     #48; //String Entering isValidRequest
   90:  invokestatic    #331; //Method com/mycompany/myapp/aspects/tracing/myAspect.hasAspect:()Z
   93:  ifeq    102
   96:  invokestatic    #325; //Method com/mycompany/myapp/aspects/tracing/myAspect.aspectOf:()Lcom/mycompany/myapp/aspects/tracing/myAspect;
   99:  invokevirtual   #328; //Method com/mycompany/myapp/aspects/tracing/myAspect.ajc$before$com_mycompany_myapp_aspects_tracing_myAspect$2$58016c43:()V
   102: invokevirtual   #50; //Method org/apache/log4j/Logger.warn:(Ljava/lang/Object;)V
   105: goto    125
   108: astore  13
   110: invokestatic    #331; //Method com/mycompany/myapp/aspects/tracing/myAspect.hasAspect:()Z
   113: ifeq    122
   116: invokestatic    #325; //Method com/mycompany/myapp/aspects/tracing/myAspect.aspectOf:()Lcom/mycompany/myapp/aspects/tracing/myAspect;
   119: invokevirtual   #336; //Method com/mycompany/myapp/aspects/tracing/myAspect.ajc$after$com_mycompany_myapp_aspects_tracing_myAspect$3$58016c43:()V
   122: aload   13
   124: athrow
   125: nop
   126: invokestatic    #331; //Method com/mycompany/myapp/aspects/tracing/myAspect.hasAspect:()Z
   129: ifeq    138
   132: invokestatic    #325; //Method com/mycompany/myapp/aspects/tracing/myAspect.aspectOf:()Lcom/mycompany/myapp/aspects/tracing/myAspect;
   135: invokevirtual   #336; //Method com/mycompany/myapp/aspects/tracing/myAspect.ajc$after$com_mycompany_myapp_aspects_tracing_myAspect$3$58016c43:()V


I am a little puzzled by what seem to be two calls to after(119 & 135).



________________________________________
From: aspectj-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [aspectj-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] on behalf of Andy Clement [andrew.clement@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 8:56 AM
To: aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [aspectj-users] Puzzling problem using AspectJ

Hi,

So you are not loadtime weaving, you are just compile time weaving.
The weaveinfo messages indicate the bytecode is being modified.  I
guess you could check the woven output from the compile and verify the
calls to the logger have been advised.  Using 'javap -private
-verbose' against a class in the woven output you should see wherever
there is a call to getLogger there is a call to the advice?

Actually, one thing does seem unusual.  Is your pointcut definetly just this:

call(* org.apache.log4j.Logger.*(..)) && !within(*..*Aspect);

and in a singleton aspect?

Because that can be fully statically matched, so I don't understand
why your weaveinfo message is suffixed with '[with runtime test]'.  If
the runtime test (whatever it is) is failing it will not be running
your advice.  If you want to post the snippet of bytecode around the
calls to getLogger we can check what the runtime test is.

Andy