| Status and future plans for AspectJ/AJDT? (mustang support in particular) [message #63421] |
Sun, 02 April 2006 15:57  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: nospam.nospam.no
With AspectJ/AJDT since December offering full support for JDK1.5 and
runtime weaving and lots of other great new stuff, what are the current and
future plans for AspectJ/AJDT ? In particular what will happen with
AspectJ/AJDT in order to be compatible with Mustang and Eclipse 3.2 as they
are released later this year ?
Will AspectJ play nice with the changes to the class format in mustang and
with the integrated JSR 269 annotation processor in the javac 1.6 compiler
(among other issues, if ajc is continue to be a viable replacement for javac
surely it must also support the internal annotation processor).
The reason I ask it that I would like to be able to use JDK1.6 with it's new
JSR 269 annotation processing + eclipse 3.2 + AspectJ/AJDT (and maybe Spring
but that is another issue). Will that be possible? If yes, when ?
Thanks,
Morten
|
|
|
|
| Re: Status and future plans for AspectJ/AJDT? (mustang support in particular) [message #63513 is a reply to message #63421] |
Sun, 02 April 2006 18:17  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: clemas.uk.ibm.com
MortenCh wrote:
> With AspectJ/AJDT since December offering full support for JDK1.5 and
> runtime weaving and lots of other great new stuff, what are the current and
> future plans for AspectJ/AJDT ? In particular what will happen with
> AspectJ/AJDT in order to be compatible with Mustang and Eclipse 3.2 as they
> are released later this year ?
>
> Will AspectJ play nice with the changes to the class format in mustang and
> with the integrated JSR 269 annotation processor in the javac 1.6 compiler
> (among other issues, if ajc is continue to be a viable replacement for javac
> surely it must also support the internal annotation processor).
>
> The reason I ask it that I would like to be able to use JDK1.6 with it's new
> JSR 269 annotation processing + eclipse 3.2 + AspectJ/AJDT (and maybe Spring
> but that is another issue). Will that be possible? If yes, when ?
>
> Thanks,
> Morten
>
>
And i'll take the AspectJ question. When Eclipse 3.2 is 'complete' we
will upgrade AspectJ to be based on that level of the compiler. At that
point we will pick up their support for jsr202 (class file format
changes) and jsr269 (annotation processing spec). I know support for the
former is already in the 3.2 milestones, but I don't think full support
for jsr269 is (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong??). There will be
an outstanding question about the class file format changes and our
weaver which I've not tackled yet.
Aim for the next few days is AspectJ1.5.1 - I have one more incremental
compilation bug to fix before it ships. As Matt says, the main focus
right now is that we want to scale up and build larger projects, in
shorter time and using less memory - and 1.5.1 (and accompanying AJDT)
is a first step towards that, requiring half the memory that 1.5.0 did
under Eclipse.
Andy.
|
|
|
| Re: Status and future plans for AspectJ/AJDT? (mustang support in particular) [message #63606 is a reply to message #63513] |
Mon, 03 April 2006 16:36 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: nospam.nospam.no
"Andy Clement" <clemas@uk.ibm.com> wrote in message
news:e0p4gd$hdh$1@utils.eclipse.org...
> And i'll take the AspectJ question. When Eclipse 3.2 is 'complete' we
> will upgrade AspectJ to be based on that level of the compiler. At that
> point we will pick up their support for jsr202 (class file format changes)
> and jsr269 (annotation processing spec). I know support for the former is
> already in the 3.2 milestones, but I don't think full support for jsr269
> is (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong??). There will be an outstanding
> question about the class file format changes and our weaver which I've not
> tackled yet.
First of all, thanks for the comprehensive answer!
Sounds great. I look forward to try mustang + eclipse 3.2 + aspectj out! As
you said
there might be a problem with jsr269 (but not because of AspectJ).
> Aim for the next few days is AspectJ1.5.1 - I have one more incremental
> compilation bug to fix before it ships. As Matt says, the main focus
> right now is that we want to scale up and build larger projects, in
> shorter time and using less memory - and 1.5.1 (and accompanying AJDT) is
> a first step towards that, requiring half the memory that 1.5.0 did under
> Eclipse.
Sounds like a good goal.... If I can blatantly advertise for my special
needs here,
I would like that AspectJ/AJDT offers support for multiple source/output
folders which I
find are quite useful for java projects. I think such a feaure should be in
line with your goal
of "scalability" as it allows the developer to better manage large/complex
projects. As I recall
there is already some bug reports on this. Any chance we will see support
for this ?
Cheers,
Morten Christensen
|
|
|
| Re: Status and future plans for AspectJ/AJDT? (mustang support in particular) [message #63627 is a reply to message #63467] |
Mon, 03 April 2006 16:38 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: nospam.nospam.no
"Matt Chapman" <mpchapman@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:bd656b314910b7b97583dd74bcebcc46$1@www.eclipse.org...
>I can answer the AJDT side of things - yes we will fully support Eclipse
>3.2. We're working on a development build to support yesterday's 3.2M6
>milestone, and will continue with development builds until a final AJDT 1.4
>release very close to the Eclipse 3.2 release. Our priority is making sure
>AJDT can be used with large projects - so things like memory usage and
>performance, plus tools to manage high levels of crosscutting.
Thanks for the in-depth answer! I look forward to try it. In particular I
like that
you aim for a release very close to eclipse 3.2.
I have made some more comments in a seperate reply about AspectJ.
Morten Christensen
|
|
|
| Re: Status and future plans for AspectJ/AJDT? (mustang support in particular) [message #63650 is a reply to message #63606] |
Mon, 03 April 2006 18:25 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: clemas.uk.ibm.com
MortenCh wrote:
> Sounds like a good goal.... If I can blatantly advertise for my special
> needs here,
> I would like that AspectJ/AJDT offers support for multiple source/output
> folders which I
> find are quite useful for java projects. I think such a feaure should be in
> line with your goal
> of "scalability" as it allows the developer to better manage large/complex
> projects. As I recall
> there is already some bug reports on this. Any chance we will see support
> for this ?
That is becoming a popular bug ... maybe we'll have to up its priority ;)
Andy.
|
|
|
| Re: Status and future plans for AspectJ/AJDT? (mustang support in particular) [message #63693 is a reply to message #63513] |
Tue, 04 April 2006 02:35 |
 Eugene Kuleshov
Messages: 504
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Andy,
I'd be interested to know about your findings about Java6 class file
format changes. More specifically how are you going to calculate or
update ClassMapTable data structures that are added for bytecode version
50. Basic idea is that for each conditional branch you have to provide
state information for local variables as well as stack state. There is
some optimization can be used to compress such info (e.g. use delta from
previous stack frame).
So, when method bytecode is changed by AJ weaver, and when bytecode
version is 50+, stack map frames has to be recalculated if woven code
changed or added new variables or stack frames or introduced new
conditional branches or try catch blocks. You can, of course downgrade
bytecode version to 49 (Java 5 level) to fall back to old verifier and
this would not make much of the difference (unless someone will use
undocumented jvm options to force use of new verifier) since there are
no new features introduced in Java 6.
By the way, if there are plans to migrate AJ code to use ASM for
bytecode manipulation? It has been suggested some time ago and decision
been postponed till AJ 5 release.
regards,
Eugene
PS: While working on Java 6 support in ASM framework we did some
research around partial stack map updates and implemented incremental
transformer for LocalVariableSorter adapter (which allows to introduce
new variables and renumber existing vars). We also have option to
recalculate stack map info from scratch and to expand packed frames.
Andy Clement wrote:
....
> And i'll take the AspectJ question. When Eclipse 3.2 is 'complete' we
> will upgrade AspectJ to be based on that level of the compiler. At that
> point we will pick up their support for jsr202 (class file format
> changes) and jsr269 (annotation processing spec). I know support for the
> former is already in the 3.2 milestones, but I don't think full support
> for jsr269 is (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong??). There will be
> an outstanding question about the class file format changes and our
> weaver which I've not tackled yet.
>
> Aim for the next few days is AspectJ1.5.1 - I have one more incremental
> compilation bug to fix before it ships. As Matt says, the main focus
> right now is that we want to scale up and build larger projects, in
> shorter time and using less memory - and 1.5.1 (and accompanying AJDT)
> is a first step towards that, requiring half the memory that 1.5.0 did
> under Eclipse.
>
> Andy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Status and future plans for AspectJ/AJDT? (mustang support in particular) [message #592953 is a reply to message #63513] |
Mon, 03 April 2006 16:36 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: nospam.nospam.no
"Andy Clement" <clemas@uk.ibm.com> wrote in message
news:e0p4gd$hdh$1@utils.eclipse.org...
> And i'll take the AspectJ question. When Eclipse 3.2 is 'complete' we
> will upgrade AspectJ to be based on that level of the compiler. At that
> point we will pick up their support for jsr202 (class file format changes)
> and jsr269 (annotation processing spec). I know support for the former is
> already in the 3.2 milestones, but I don't think full support for jsr269
> is (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong??). There will be an outstanding
> question about the class file format changes and our weaver which I've not
> tackled yet.
First of all, thanks for the comprehensive answer!
Sounds great. I look forward to try mustang + eclipse 3.2 + aspectj out! As
you said
there might be a problem with jsr269 (but not because of AspectJ).
> Aim for the next few days is AspectJ1.5.1 - I have one more incremental
> compilation bug to fix before it ships. As Matt says, the main focus
> right now is that we want to scale up and build larger projects, in
> shorter time and using less memory - and 1.5.1 (and accompanying AJDT) is
> a first step towards that, requiring half the memory that 1.5.0 did under
> Eclipse.
Sounds like a good goal.... If I can blatantly advertise for my special
needs here,
I would like that AspectJ/AJDT offers support for multiple source/output
folders which I
find are quite useful for java projects. I think such a feaure should be in
line with your goal
of "scalability" as it allows the developer to better manage large/complex
projects. As I recall
there is already some bug reports on this. Any chance we will see support
for this ?
Cheers,
Morten Christensen
|
|
|
| Re: Status and future plans for AspectJ/AJDT? (mustang support in particular) [message #592966 is a reply to message #63467] |
Mon, 03 April 2006 16:38 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: nospam.nospam.no
"Matt Chapman" <mpchapman@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:bd656b314910b7b97583dd74bcebcc46$1@www.eclipse.org...
>I can answer the AJDT side of things - yes we will fully support Eclipse
>3.2. We're working on a development build to support yesterday's 3.2M6
>milestone, and will continue with development builds until a final AJDT 1.4
>release very close to the Eclipse 3.2 release. Our priority is making sure
>AJDT can be used with large projects - so things like memory usage and
>performance, plus tools to manage high levels of crosscutting.
Thanks for the in-depth answer! I look forward to try it. In particular I
like that
you aim for a release very close to eclipse 3.2.
I have made some more comments in a seperate reply about AspectJ.
Morten Christensen
|
|
|
|
| Re: Status and future plans for AspectJ/AJDT? (mustang support in particular) [message #593003 is a reply to message #63513] |
Tue, 04 April 2006 02:35 |
Eugene Kuleshov
Messages: 504
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Andy,
I'd be interested to know about your findings about Java6 class file
format changes. More specifically how are you going to calculate or
update ClassMapTable data structures that are added for bytecode version
50. Basic idea is that for each conditional branch you have to provide
state information for local variables as well as stack state. There is
some optimization can be used to compress such info (e.g. use delta from
previous stack frame).
So, when method bytecode is changed by AJ weaver, and when bytecode
version is 50+, stack map frames has to be recalculated if woven code
changed or added new variables or stack frames or introduced new
conditional branches or try catch blocks. You can, of course downgrade
bytecode version to 49 (Java 5 level) to fall back to old verifier and
this would not make much of the difference (unless someone will use
undocumented jvm options to force use of new verifier) since there are
no new features introduced in Java 6.
By the way, if there are plans to migrate AJ code to use ASM for
bytecode manipulation? It has been suggested some time ago and decision
been postponed till AJ 5 release.
regards,
Eugene
PS: While working on Java 6 support in ASM framework we did some
research around partial stack map updates and implemented incremental
transformer for LocalVariableSorter adapter (which allows to introduce
new variables and renumber existing vars). We also have option to
recalculate stack map info from scratch and to expand packed frames.
Andy Clement wrote:
....
> And i'll take the AspectJ question. When Eclipse 3.2 is 'complete' we
> will upgrade AspectJ to be based on that level of the compiler. At that
> point we will pick up their support for jsr202 (class file format
> changes) and jsr269 (annotation processing spec). I know support for the
> former is already in the 3.2 milestones, but I don't think full support
> for jsr269 is (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong??). There will be
> an outstanding question about the class file format changes and our
> weaver which I've not tackled yet.
>
> Aim for the next few days is AspectJ1.5.1 - I have one more incremental
> compilation bug to fix before it ships. As Matt says, the main focus
> right now is that we want to scale up and build larger projects, in
> shorter time and using less memory - and 1.5.1 (and accompanying AJDT)
> is a first step towards that, requiring half the memory that 1.5.0 did
> under Eclipse.
>
> Andy.
|
|
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03639 seconds
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
