Hi MattOng,
Please take a time to understand the semantics of call and execution
pointcuts in AspectJ. The latter one instruments the supplier code. Hence,
when you used the call pointcut, you interceped only the "calls" in your
app code. In other words, you're not instrumenting the supplier code by
changing a method or trying to access a private field. Because of that you
do not need to weave the java classes.
In summary, you aspect below is intercepting only the call to the method
"System.currentTimeMillis()" made within the static method MillisUser().
cheers,
Henrique
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 10:16 PM, MattOng <on...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi Andy,
>
> Apply that to the JVM classes:
> ajc -inpath rt.jar StringUtils.java -outjar newrt.jar
>
> Thanks very much, this shows that it is an eclipse AJDT only restriction
> and
> not the AspectJ compiler.
> ------------------------------------------
>
> The reason I am asking this sort of question is because JRuby(which also
> supports this sort of Meta Programming in "open class" done it even at
> script level to allow java class to access the new feature introduce to a
> final class.)
>
> ------------------------------------------
> Here is something that I do not understand. Why this is perfectly working
> without error in eclipse plugin AJDT and NOT
>
> public aspect JavaLangSystemAspect {
> /**
> * Selects calls to System.currentTimeMillis() occurring within tested
> code.
> */
> pointcut currentTimeMillis() :
> call(public long System.currentTimeMillis());
>
>
> long around() : currentTimeMillis(){
> return 12345;
> }
> }
>
> -----------------------------------------------
> public class SystemUser
> {
>
> public static void MillisUser(){
> // will show only 12345
> System.out.println("The
> currentTimeMilis:"+System.currentTimeMillis());
> }
>
> public static void main(String[] args)
> {
> MillisUser(); // will show only 12345
> }
>
> }
> --------------------------------------
>
> I can't comment on the legality of it, but I perhaps wouldn't advise
> shipping a product that included a modified set of classes like this.
> ---------------------------------------
> This is strange, because the above around point cut is more dangerous than
> to introduce new methods to a immutable objects.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://aspectj.2085585.n4.nabble.com/How-to-add-methods-to-java-lang-String-tp4650376p4650382.html
> Sent from the AspectJ - users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> aspectj-users mailing list
> aspectj-users@eclipse.org
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
>
--
...............................................................................................................................
Henrique Rebelo
http://www.cin.ufpe.br/~hemr
Informatics Center, UFPE, Brazil
_______________________________________________
aspectj-users mailing list
aspectj-users@eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
