Dear All, I want to use aopmetrics tool to compare OO Vs AO metrics, please somebody tell me, how and where i can get these aopmetrics tool,Aopmetrics tool download from http://aopmetrics.tigris.org/ is not working.Please help me.
Thanking You, Regards SK On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 10:30 PM, <aspectj-users-requ...@eclipse.org> wrote: > Send aspectj-users mailing list submissions to > aspectj-users@eclipse.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > aspectj-users-requ...@eclipse.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > aspectj-users-ow...@eclipse.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of aspectj-users digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. New feature of Aspectj 1.6.11 (Pasturel) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 18:47:59 +0100 > From: Pasturel <jean-louis.pastu...@orange.fr> > To: aspectj-users@eclipse.org > Subject: [aspectj-users] New feature of Aspectj 1.6.11 > Message-ID: <4d03b94f.60...@orange.fr> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > I open a new thread to discuss the new feature of 1.6.11 about declare > annotation > > The M1 comes with the removal of an annotation of field like specified in > the readme : > > declare @field: int Foo.i: -...@anno; > > It gives me an idea with the + sign as this : > declare @field: int Foo.i: +...@anno(param=<newValue>); > > that means a force replace : if @Anno exists remove it and replaces with > the new parametrized @Anno.If not already exists creates it with the > parametrized Anno. > > Without the - sign and without the + sign, it creates the Annotation on > field or if already exists throws an exception ( that is certainly the > current behavior => Andy?). > > What do you think about that ? > > JL PASTUREL > > <Andy_Post> > > Hi, > > I didn't write about using it in that way as we don't 100% yet define > the rules there - well I might define it as undefined right now:) It > might work right now but I'd need to confirm I want that ordering to > remain reliable and stable. Any values you specify for the removal > are actually not used right now, the removal is done based solely on > the name - this means you'll get what you want if the removal runs > first. I might add value matching enforcement later. Yes, at some > point it will be added across all the declare annotation forms for > consistency. > > Andy > </Andy_Post> > > > On 9 December 2010 23:14,<jeanlouis.pastu...@orange-ftgroup.com> wrote: > > > I see that 1.6.11M1 includes removal Annotation for field. > > Just a question : > > Is this kind of declare annotation below, supported in the same aspect : > ? > > > > @Aspect > > public class MyAspect > > { > > declare @field: int Foo.i: -...@anno(init=0); > > declare @field: int Foo.i: @Anno(init=5); > > ... > > > > } > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > aspectj-users mailing list > aspectj-users@eclipse.org > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users > > > End of aspectj-users Digest, Vol 70, Issue 9 > ******************************************** >
_______________________________________________ aspectj-users mailing list aspectj-users@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
