I second that question. Am I right though in thinking that AspectJ is
really about targeting join points
at the byte code level? If this is remains true - and I can't see how
it would be practical to change this -
then you'd always have to be aware of how the scala source code for
example gets de-sugared.
I'd be very interested in tighter integration between scala and AspectJ.
- Ashley
On 20 Jul 2009, at 14:02, Michael McCray wrote:
Hi All,
I was wondering if it is required that AspectJ is tied to the Java
Language? I see that is what the J is for, but there are some new
languages like JavaFX and Scala that I don't think have supporting
aspect extension languages. There is http://functionaljava.org/, a
variant of Java that supports closures and other functional language
concepts. What if AspectJ could become AspectJVM and support other
JVM languages? I understand LTW can do much of what I ask, how far
off is LTW from a real integration? I mean it would be nice to
write my aspect code using other language features as well at least
this would not be possible until the aspectj language specification
changed.
Why not add closures to AspectJ to support it's usage in aspects?
How is it decided to evolve the language?
Mike
_______________________________________________
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
