|
| Re: ajdt API Reference? [message #13816 is a reply to message #13756] |
Mon, 06 January 2003 19:06   |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: adrian_colyer.uk.ibm.com
Frank Sauer wrote:
> Where is the ajdt API Reference?
> I'm trying to determine if there is an API similar to the jdt.core with an
> AST that
> can be used to traverse AspectJ source.
> Frank Sauer
AJDT currently uses the structure model provided by the Ajde package of
the AspectJ
compiler: see the StructureViewNode and StructureViewNodeFactory in the
org.aspectj.ajde.ui package. The structure model itself is comprised of
org.aspectj.asm.StructureNode s.
See the AJDT package org.eclipse.ajdt.internal.core for an example of how
we use
those classes to build a model suitable for rendering by Eclipse. You
might also want to
look at org.eclipse.ajdt.internal.ui.editor.AspectJContentOutlinePag e.
Note that AspectJ 1.1b2 doesn't yet have full structure model support, so
you won't get
back all the information you expect from it. AspectJ 1.1 extends the JDT
compiler, and
also the JDT AST, so in time we hope to be able to use (an extension of
the) JDT model
to traverse aspect source too, and at that point in time AJDT will stop
using the Ajde
package (thought the other IDEs will continue to do so).
Regards,
Adrian.
|
|
|
| Re: ajdt API Reference? [message #15114 is a reply to message #13816] |
Mon, 06 January 2003 20:26 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: mark.nospam.com
Adrian,
Adrian Colyer wrote:
[snip]
> back all the information you expect from it. AspectJ 1.1 extends the JDT
> compiler, and
> also the JDT AST, so in time we hope to be able to use (an extension of
could you please give us a rough estimate on when that 'in time' will
be? is that something we can expect in the 1.1 timeframe?
if Ajde is gone (at least for Eclipse users) - does that mean aspectj
will work in a 2.1 stream?
> the) JDT model
> to traverse aspect source too, and at that point in time AJDT will stop
> using the Ajde
> package (thought the other IDEs will continue to do so).
>
> Regards,
> Adrian.
thanks,
mark
|
|
|
| Re: ajdt API Reference? [message #15141 is a reply to message #15114] |
Tue, 07 January 2003 09:04 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: adrian_colyer.uk.ibm.com
Mark wrote:
<snip, snip/>
> > back all the information you expect from it. AspectJ 1.1 extends the JDT
> > compiler, and
> > also the JDT AST, so in time we hope to be able to use (an extension of
> could you please give us a rough estimate on when that 'in time' will
> be? is that something we can expect in the 1.1 timeframe?
> if Ajde is gone (at least for Eclipse users) - does that mean aspectj
> will work in a 2.1 stream?
> thanks,
> mark
Certainly in the 1.1 timeframe :). Things were hectic in the run up to
Christmas organising the transfer of AspectJ to eclipse.org. We're working
on an AJDT version right now that works with the 1.1 compiler: this
hasn't been released yet because there isn't quite enough support in
1.1b2 at the moment for the plugin to be sufficiently functional. Ideally
we will synchronize the release of the plugin with the 1.1 (full) release
of AspectJ, but if we don't make that we will aim to lag behind by no
more than a week. That version will most likely still be based on Ajde.
Ajde is not going to go away, and will always be an option, it's simply
that within eclipse, by switching to an approach that extends the Java
model,
we hope to get much tighter integration with the rest of JDT - elements in
the packages view, hierarchy views etc. etc. that we don't support right
now because doing so requires us to first duplicate all of the JDT function
in those areas.
AJDT can be moved onto the 2.1 stream with little difficulty - our
policy to date has been to work from the most current release as a stable
base, but I'm interested to hear if you'd rather we switched to a policy
of using the latest stable build. Moving AspectJ itself may take more work,
since the new ajc compiler extends some (internal) JDT classes that are
subject to change. I need to double check with Jim Hugunin and Mik
Kersten what the plans are for that, but my understanding from
before Christmas was that completing 1.1 (on a 2.0.x) base takes
higher priority over a move to a 2.1 base at the moment.
Regards,
Adrian.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: ajdt API Reference? [message #563866 is a reply to message #15114] |
Tue, 07 January 2003 09:04 |
 Adrian Colyer
Messages: 61
Registered: July 2009 |
Member |
|
|
Mark wrote:
<snip, snip/>
> > back all the information you expect from it. AspectJ 1.1 extends the JDT
> > compiler, and
> > also the JDT AST, so in time we hope to be able to use (an extension of
> could you please give us a rough estimate on when that 'in time' will
> be? is that something we can expect in the 1.1 timeframe?
> if Ajde is gone (at least for Eclipse users) - does that mean aspectj
> will work in a 2.1 stream?
> thanks,
> mark
Certainly in the 1.1 timeframe :). Things were hectic in the run up to
Christmas organising the transfer of AspectJ to eclipse.org. We're working
on an AJDT version right now that works with the 1.1 compiler: this
hasn't been released yet because there isn't quite enough support in
1.1b2 at the moment for the plugin to be sufficiently functional. Ideally
we will synchronize the release of the plugin with the 1.1 (full) release
of AspectJ, but if we don't make that we will aim to lag behind by no
more than a week. That version will most likely still be based on Ajde.
Ajde is not going to go away, and will always be an option, it's simply
that within eclipse, by switching to an approach that extends the Java
model,
we hope to get much tighter integration with the rest of JDT - elements in
the packages view, hierarchy views etc. etc. that we don't support right
now because doing so requires us to first duplicate all of the JDT function
in those areas.
AJDT can be moved onto the 2.1 stream with little difficulty - our
policy to date has been to work from the most current release as a stable
base, but I'm interested to hear if you'd rather we switched to a policy
of using the latest stable build. Moving AspectJ itself may take more work,
since the new ajc compiler extends some (internal) JDT classes that are
subject to change. I need to double check with Jim Hugunin and Mik
Kersten what the plans are for that, but my understanding from
before Christmas was that completing 1.1 (on a 2.0.x) base takes
higher priority over a move to a 2.1 base at the moment.
Regards,
Adrian.
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.04765 seconds
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
