B has A added to its manifest file as a Required Plugin whereas A has no dependency to B in its manifest file. Both A & B are added as binary inpath to the AspectJified projects which should be woven by the aspect(s). Is it perhaps enough to add B to the inpath?
Structure 101 reports the following: >From Usage To A.<init> references .B A.<init> calls .B.aspectOf A.formatJoinPoint references .B A.formatJoinPoint calls .B.aspectOf A.logWarning references .B A.logWarning calls .B.aspectOf (I have of course renamed the aspects to A & B in my mail) On Nov 29, 2007 2:12 PM, Andy Clement <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Are you simply using project dependencies so that B can see A? Or > aspectpath? Or inpath? > > I cannot see a reason for A to reference B unless you have explicitly > directly mentioned the types of B in your abstract aspect. If you > supply more information, maybe we can work out why > > Andy. > > On 29/11/2007, Johan Haleby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I have two aspects and one of them is abstract (A) and the other one (B) > > extends A and and provides the concrete implementation. A & B are in two > > separate projects. When I examine my project in Structure 101 it says > that I > > have a package tangle between A & B. It seems like A is referencing and > > calling B and B must obviously know of A since it extends it. Is this > the > > correct behavior? It's sad that you have to live with an extra tangle > that I > > can do nothing about. > > > > Thanks, > > Johan > > > > _______________________________________________ > > aspectj-users mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users > > > > > _______________________________________________ > aspectj-users mailing list > [email protected] > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users >
_______________________________________________ aspectj-users mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
