Re: [aspectj-users] Problems with a basic staticinitialization pointcut

[Andy Clement <andrew.clement@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

You will only see your message when the static initializer runs. The
class may get loaded and used (to some degree) without that happening.
 For example, here are some simple types:

@Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
@interface Foo {
}

public class Code {
  @Foo
  public static void main(String []argv) throws Exception {
  }
}

I can compile that and run 'Code' without the Foo static initializer running.

But if I change Code to do something with it, then we will see the
initializer running:

public class Code {
  @Foo
  public static void main(String []argv) throws Exception {
    Foo f = Code.class.getDeclaredMethod("main",String[].class).getAnnotation(Foo.class);
  }
}

Can it be that some of your code just isn't exercising the annotations
enough to see their static initializers run?

I've never seen the "is missing <clinit>" message before, but I see it
is classified as a bit odd:
https://forums.oracle.com/forums/thread.jspa?messageID=4824974

I don't speak Maven very well - is AspectJ being used to build those
annotation types? (I'm not sure if you are building everything from
source or just weaving via a post compile step).

If you remove your aspect the "is missing" messages all disappear?

cheers,
Andy

On 25 October 2012 08:24, Timothy Armstrong <tim.armstrong@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Thanks for your replies. Yes, I get the same behavior when I put version
> 1.6.11 in the POM, just without the "bad version number" warning. I should
> have posted that version. I always get the "advice defined in ... has not
> been applied" warnings for the other aspects, but they still work. It does
> compile when I specify an annotation, such as
> "staticinitialization(@OWLClass *)". I posted the only lines in the POM
> having to do with AspectJ, so I don't know where else filters would be that
> ignore the test tree.
>
> Thanks,
> Tim
>
>
>
> On 10/25/2012 09:19 AM, Krzysztof Dębski wrote:
>>
>> aspectj-maven-plugin doesn't support aspectj 1.7
>>
>> see: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MASPECTJ-108
>>
>> Krzysztof Debski
>>
>> 2012/10/24 Romain MULLER <romain.muller@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>>
>>> I surely am no maven guru and I won't risk myself in trying to comment
>>> your POM. That said, on the Maven error, I think the following line
>>> could be of some relevance:
>>>
>>> [WARNING] bad version number found in
>>> /home/tim/.m2/repository/org/aspectj/aspectjrt/1.7.0/aspectjrt-1.7.0.jar
>>> expected 1.6.11 found 1.7.0
>>>
>>> This looks dodgy, I would try to arrange things so that this warning
>>> isn't produced anymore before digging any further on the maven errors.
>>>
>>> On the eclipse side, I'd recommend checking that your AspectJ compiler
>>> options don't have filters that get your test tree ignored by the
>>> compile-time weaver. I know it's kind of an "are you sure your
>>> computer is plugged to a power socket" check, but they very often give
>>> good results ;)
>>>
>>> _________________________
>>> Sent over RFC-1149 compliant transport - please excuse occasionnal packet
>>> loss
>>>
>>> Le 24 oct. 2012 à 22:08, Timothy Armstrong <tim.armstrong@xxxxxxx> a
>>> écrit :
>>>
>>>> [WARNING] bad version number found in
>>>> /home/tim/.m2/repository/org/aspectj/aspectjrt/1.7.0/aspectjrt-1.7.0.jar
>>>> expected 1.6.11 found 1.7.0
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aspectj-users mailing list
> aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users