Hi all,
I was wondering whether we can expose the target object of a call pointcut.
Consider the following simple class:
class C {
public C () {}
...
}
along with the simple call pointcut and an after returning advice that uses
such a pointcut:
pointcut callConst(C c) : call (public C.new()) && target(c);
after (C c) returning() : callConst(c){
//advice code
}
The call pointcut callConst() will match any call to C's constructor but
only when it does not include the target designator. Without the target
designator we cannot expose the target object.
So, in the above example, the call is not matched! If we change the call to
execution pointcut it matches normally (with context exposure )!
I want to know the main problem to have accessible the target object in a
call pointcut that is used in a after returning advice. As I said, we can
expose the object If we use a after returning advice with execution
pointcut. But, according to the AspectJ semantics, after returning call will
occurs just after the method finishes its execution, so I ask again, Why we
cannot use context exposure during a call? (at this time the, the
constructor already instantiated the object!!). Is there a reason for that?
or just a language limitation...
I just want to have interesting discussions about the AspectJ semantics!
cheers,
Henrique
--
...............................................................................................................................
Henrique Rebelo
http://www.cin.ufpe.br/~hemr
Informatics Center, UFPE, Brazil
_______________________________________________
aspectj-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
