To follow up, I found these references in the archive about the same topic.
http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/aspectj-users/msg07722.html http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/aspectj-users/msg05884.html I found a question posted here that interested me but was never answered: http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/aspectj-users/msg05884.html > The short question is: > When using @DeclareParents to define a mixin, how do I gain access to > the instrumented object from within the mixin object? I was hoping someone might be able to answer this previously asked question. Regards, Larry ________________________________ From: Andy Clement [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2008 8:34 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [aspectj-users] RE: declare parents semantics clarification withannotations on interface mixin 2008/7/25 Larry Chu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> This excerpt from the AspectJ 5 Developer's Notebook, "It's very important to preserve the same semantics between the code style and the annotation style," which is implying that the semantics are the same is just misleading, because the semantics are indeed quite different. I agree that is misleading. Although we want to have identical semantics there are places where it is just not possible and mixins were added as a kind of best-can-do for AspectJ intertype declarations. There may still be places where mixins can be tweaked to bring them more inline with what is possible for ITDs (they haven't had a lot of work done on them) but at the very least the doc needs updating to detail the difference in semantics in this area, I just haven't had the time. cheers, Andy.
_______________________________________________ aspectj-users mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
