On Dec 12, 2008, at 14:58 , Andy Clement wrote:
If you are using this()/target() to bind context, be aware that they
will not match in a static context (this() wont match when the join
point occurs within a static method for example, and there is no
target() if a call is to a static method). In these cases you need
two sets of pointcuts, one set to handle the static case and one to
handle the non-static case.
Just wondering:
Why not following Java's way of dealing with the fact that classes are
not true objects? ie. one uses null for the this object in a
reflective static method invocation -- so this()/target() could expose
null, no?
That would avoid this kind of ad-hoc non-uniformity. It is quite odd
that just by exposing context, one needs to double his pointcut
definitions.
(of course a nicer alternative would be to really pass the class
object as being the target/this, but that may be too much to ask
for ;)).
-- Éric_______________________________________________
aspectj-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
