[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[aspectj-users] Weaving with aspectJ from different packages
- From: Trasca Virgil <virgil_trasca@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 09:02:05 -0700 (PDT)
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=p0ozBPsR9V2aSOFQyG0yVuGDtC0PGUKLL7nhbUjIgrBcBUSxREWEBDxKBrO5TGXDB2dTYASSxhZ4AQthqWpMwmK3kUq2IwLUfbGgUaXrumaBakhzBmzur3CBYscAV5yDMFHF3DsZg64wUeFeKJtBP4GBLdtbmj3rr6Rc4dXD7y4= ;
I have 2 packages P1 and P2. With aspectj I want
to catch all calls from P2 to public interface of P1 +
some calls from P2 to P2.
I was able to do that by putting the aspectJ
code(aj file) into P2 and compiling with iajc the P2.
But I need to put the aspectJ code in a totally
separated package P3 and to get the same result.
Moving the aspectJ code(aj file) in package P3
and building P3 with iajc I am able to build with
SUCCESS but I am not getting any pointcut. What I am
wrong? Is not possible to catch calls from P2 to P1
and from P2 to P2 by putting the aspectJ code in a
separate package P3 and making iajc on P3?
Thanks a lot,
--- aspectj-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Send aspectj-users mailing list submissions to
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web,
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body
> 'help' to
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it
> is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of aspectj-users digest..."
> Today's Topics:
> 1. RE: If pointcut and side effects (Eric Bodden)
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 17:21:43 -0400
> From: "Eric Bodden" <eric.bodden@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: RE: [aspectj-users] If pointcut and side
> To: <aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> > Is it correct then to say that in the absence of
> if pointcuts with
> > effects, the evaluation order does not matter? No
> other pointcut than
> > if can have side effects?
> That should be correct, yes.
> > I understand you wonder where I want to go with
> this :) I'm doing
> > analysis of control and data dependencies in
> relation to faults in
> > pointcuts, and in such a scenario it could be
> useful to be able to
> > state things about control and data dependencies
> between the different
> > conditions of a pointcut.
> I see.
> > But relying on implementation decisions is
> > probably a bad thing anyway.
> aspectj-users mailing list
> End of aspectj-users Digest, Vol 16, Issue 4