From 9de8934023a9ef9308c31773de042e9fe3b627ab Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: aclement Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 16:46:44 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] 1.6.9 readme (m1) --- docs/dist/doc/README-169.html | 144 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ docs/dist/doc/index.html | 1 + 2 files changed, 145 insertions(+) create mode 100644 docs/dist/doc/README-169.html diff --git a/docs/dist/doc/README-169.html b/docs/dist/doc/README-169.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..7e1e5d940 --- /dev/null +++ b/docs/dist/doc/README-169.html @@ -0,0 +1,144 @@ + + +AspectJ 1.6.9 Readme + + + + +
+© Copyright 2010 Contributors. +All rights reserved. +
+ +

AspectJ 1.6.9 Readme

+ +

Features of 1.6.9 milestone 1

+ +

Message inserts for declare warning/error messages

+ +

It is now possible to use joinpoint context in the messages attached to declare warning and declare error constructs. Some +examples:

+ +
+declare warning: execution(* A.m(..)): "joinpoint is {joinpoint}";
+declare warning: execution(* A.m(..)): "joinpoint kind is '{joinpoint.kind}'";
+declare warning: get(int *) && within(A): "joinpoint signature is {joinpoint.signature}";
+declare warning: execution(* A.m(..)): "joinpoint declaring type is {joinpoint.signature.declaringType}";
+declare warning: execution(* A.m(..)): "signature name for method is {joinpoint.signature.name}";
+declare warning: execution(* A.m(..)): "joinpoint location is {joinpoint.sourcelocation.sourcefile}:{joinpoint.sourcelocation.line}";
+declare warning: execution(* A.m(..)): "joinpoint line is '{joinpoint.sourcelocation.line}'";
+
+declare warning: get(int *): "warning is from aspect {advice.aspecttype}";
+declare warning: execution(* A.m(..)): "warning sourcelocation is {advice.sourcelocation.sourcefile}:{advice.sourcelocation.line}";
+
 + +

The syntax is to enclose the relevant key within curly brackets within the message. Please raise an enhancement request +if you need other keys - the set supported so far are all those shown in the example above.

+ + +

declare warning/error for type patterns

+ +

It is now possible to use a type pattern with declare warning and declare error. For example:

+ +
+declare warning: I+ && !hasfield(int i): "Implementations of I are expected to have a int field called i";
+
 + +

Type category type patterns

+ +

This is the ability to narrow the types of interest so that interfaces can be ignored, or inner +types, or classes or aspects. There is now a new is() construct that enables this:

+ +
+execution(* (!is(InnerType)).m(..)) {}
+!within(* && is(InnerType)) {}
+
 + +

Options for use in is() are: ClassType, AspectType, InterfaceType, InnerType, AnonymousType, EnumType, AnonymousType.

+

Note: It is important to understand that "!within(is(InnerType))" and "within(!is(InnerType))" are not the same. The latter one is +unlikely to be what you want to use. For example here: +

+class Boo {
+  void foo() {}
+  class Bar {
+    void foo() {}
+  }
+}
+
+

Bar.foo() will match within(!is(InnerType)) because within considers all surrounding types (so although Bar doesn't match the +pattern, the surrounding Boo will match it). Bar.foo() will not match !within(is(InnerType)) because Bar will match the pattern +and then the result of that match will be negated.

+ +

Intertype fields preserve visibility and name

+ +

Some users always expect this:

+ +
+class C {
+}
+
+aspect X {
+  private int C.someField;
+}
+
 + +

To cause a private field called 'someField' to be added to C. This is conceptually what happens during compilation but if any +user then later attempts to access someField via reflection or runs a javap against the class file, they will see that isn't +what happens in practice. A public member is added with a mangled name. For code attempting to access someField built with ajc, +the visibility of the declaration will, of course, be respected. But for frameworks accessing the code later (typically through +reflection), it can cause confusion. With AspectJ 1.6.9 the name and visibility are now preserved. Compile time semantics +remain the same, it is only the weaving process that has changed to produce slightly different output.

+

Here is the output of javap when that is built with 1.6.8:

+
+class C extends java.lang.Object{
+    public int ajc$interField$X$someField;
+    C();
+}
+
 +

Here is the output of javap when that is built with 1.6.9:

+
+class C extends java.lang.Object{
+    private int someField;
+    C();
+    public static int ajc$get$someField(C);
+    public static void ajc$set$someField(C, int);
+}
+
 +

The name 'someField' is preserved. The visibility is also preserved but because of that we also need to generate some accessors +to get at the field.

+ +

AspectJ snapshots in a maven repo

+ +

To ease how AspectJ development builds can be consumed, they are now placed into a maven repo. When a new version of AspectJ +is put into AJDT it is also put into the maven.springframework.org repo. +The maven compatible repo is maven.springframework.org/snapshot/org/aspectj - and if you browse to it you will +see it currently contains 1.6.9 dev builds under the name 1.6.9.BUILD-SNAPSHOT. + +The repo is added with this magic:

+ +
+<repository>
+    <id>maven.springframework.org</id>
+    <name>SpringSource snapshots</name>
+    <url>http://maven.springframework.org/snapshot</url>
+</repository>
+
 +

+and then the version to depend upon is: + +1.6.9.BUILD-SNAPSHOT

+ +
+ +

+ + + diff --git a/docs/dist/doc/index.html b/docs/dist/doc/index.html index 15fbdd977..791418ec1 100644 --- a/docs/dist/doc/index.html +++ b/docs/dist/doc/index.html @@ -138,6 +138,7 @@ README's Changes and porting guide for AspectJ + 1.6.9, 1.6.8, 1.6.7, 1.6.6, -- 2.39.5