Simone Gianni schrieb: > I agree with you both, we could use any kind of keyword, "intertype" applies > to the first usage (ITD on a class) not on the second usage (annotate > existing members), "on", "with", "declare .... on", "add ... to" all seems > good to me. I'd keep it on plain old English words and avoid too academic > terms.
Hi Simone, just wanted to say, as a (rather) power user of AspectJ, I especially liked the keyword "on". To me it communicates the meaning very clearly in almost natural language. I often found parts of the AspectJ syntax to be a source for "alienation" and repudiation by java developers stumbling rather accidentally over the use of Aspects, maybe because it is uses in a project they are connected to in some manner. There is often the sensation that "black magic" is going on which takes away control from the developer. I think, a syntax that is almost java but at the same time communicates what is going on will be very helpful. Interestingly, for the initial situation of just introducing a single member field, the original AspectJ syntax fulfils this requirement. Just when introducing a bulk of members and especially when combined with annotations, things start to get confusing for the accidental reader. Regards Hermann V. _______________________________________________ aspectj-users mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
