Re: [aspectj-users] Simpe Question

["Adrian Colyer" <adrian.colyer@xxxxxxxxx>]

The idiom for matching top-level join points matched by some pointcut foo() is:

pointcut topLevelFoo() : foo() && !cflowbelow(foo()) ;

The "below" part is important. cflow(foo()) includes all join points matched by foo() itself, so foo() && !cflow(foo()) will never match anything. cflowbelow(foo()) on the other hand matches all join points in the flow of foo(), but excludes top-level join points matched by foo() itself.

Regards, Adrian.

On 02/03/06, Trasca Virgil <virgil_trasca@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

    Hi,
     I have a big Java API on which I want to put
AspectJ. Most of the classes in my API are derived
from  a base StatefullParentBean class or if they are
not derived from that one are used in the context of
StatefullParentBean.

  What I want is to catch before & after & return
value for all the top level calls from the classes
which are derived from StatefullParentBean. With this
I think I cover 99% of my API code as most of the
classes are derived from Statfull or are used in
StatefullParentBean.

My code (which is not working) is :

//cathc all the calls that are made in
StatefullParentBean derived classes.

pointcut whenMethodIsCalled(StatefullParentBean bean):
this(bean) && execution (* *.* (..)) &&
!within(TestAPI);

//limit just to top level calls
pointcut topLevelCalls(StatefullParentBean
bean):whenMethodIsCalled(bean) &&
!cflow(whenMethodIsCalled(StatefullParentBean));

before(StatefullParentBean bean): topLevelCalls(bean)
{
ProfilerTrace.beforeMethodIsCalle(thisJoinPoint);
}

after(StatefullParentBean bean) : topLevelCalls(bean)
{
ProfilerTrace.afterMethodIsCalled (thisJoinPoint);
}
This is not working. I put breakpoints in eclipse in
before or after and it is not reaching there.

Thanks,
Virgil





--- aspectj-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> Send aspectj-users mailing list submissions to
>       aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> 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-request@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>       aspectj-users-owner@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it
> is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of aspectj-users digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. perthis instantiation model aspects (Vincenz
> Braun)
>    2. Re: [NEWSDELIVER] Getting VerifyError with
> around        advice on
>       static method (Matthew Webster)
>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 01:23:43 +0100
> From: "Vincenz Braun" < vb@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [aspectj-users] perthis instantiation model
> aspects
> To: <aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID:
> < 000001c63d8f$939f8300$0b00a8c0@eveloxvbraun>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> I refactored an aspect using perthis instantiation
> type and faced a
> behaviour
>
> I did not expected and I can not find a reason for.
> Could somebody show me
> the problem, please?
>
>
>
> Take this simple interface:
>
>
>
> public  interface A {
>
>
>
>             public  void a();
>
> }
>
>
>
> And this class:
>
>
>
> public class B implements A {
>
>
>
>             public void a() {
>
>                         System.out.println("in B");
>
>             }
>
>
>
> public static void main(String[] args) {
>
>                         new B().a();
>
>             }
>
> }
>
>
>
> Having this aspect:
>
> public aspect TestAspect perthis(test(A)){
>
>
>
>             // this does match at runtime with
> runtime test
>
>             //pointcut test(A a): execution(public
> void A+.a()) && this(a);
>
>
>
>             // this does not match at runtime with
> runtime test
>
>             pointcut test(A a): execution(public
> void A.a()) && this(a);
>
>
>
>             void around(A a): test(a) {
>
>
> System.err.println(thisJoinPoint);
>
>                         proceed(a);
>
>             }
>
> }
>
>
>
> public aspect ExecutionAspect {
>
>
>
>             // this does match
>
>             //pointcut test(A a): execution(public
> void A+.a()) && this(a);
>
>
>
> // this also does match
>
>             pointcut test(A a): execution(public
> void A.a()) && this(a);
>
>
>
>             void around(A a): test(a) {
>
>
> System.err.println(thisJoinPoint);
>
>                         proceed(a);
>
>             }
>
> }
>
>
>
> I know I could simply drop the declaring type in the
> pointcut declaration.
>
> But I "feel" the second pointcut declaration in the
> aspect using perthis
> instantiation model
> should also work. Why is that not the case?
>
>
>
> Thank you very much,
>
> Vincenz
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
>
http://eclipse.org/pipermail/aspectj-users/attachments/20060302/842fd44c/attachment.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 11:35:48 +0000
> From: Matthew Webster < matthew_webster@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [aspectj-users] Re: [NEWSDELIVER] Getting
> VerifyError with
>       around  advice on static method
> To: Barry Kaplan < groups1@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Message-ID:
>
>
< OF2428965F.DECDA7CB-ON80257125.003F3740-80257125.003FAFE5@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Barry,
>
> Can I strongly suggest you post to aspectj-users
> which will bring you
> discussion to a wider audience.
>
> Can you answer 2 questions WRT your problem:
>
=== message truncated ===

_______________________________________________
aspectj-users mailing list
aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users

-- 
-- Adrian
adrian.colyer@xxxxxxxxx