Bug filed. https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=292262
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 6:56 AM, Matthew Adams <[email protected]> wrote: > inline > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 7:34 AM, Andy Clement <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Hi Matthew, >> >>> I just realized that there's a bug in my pointcut -- I'm not >>> supporting the prevention of accessing any fields whose class is >>> annotated with @ProtectedInternal. How would I add that one, too? >> >> set((@ProtectedInternal *) *) || get((@ProtectedInternal *) *) >> > Ah, yes. Thanks. > >> But the 'of the thing' part of your description makes it hard to >> specify the within in a general way. Obviously you can do it with a >> runtime test in some advice (or perhaps with an if() clause) but that >> prevents you using declare error. I can't think of how else to do it >> - maybe someone else can? >> >> But it doesn't seem entirely unreasonable - you just want the advise >> to be conditional on different properties of the same join point I >> wouldn't be against exploring what we can do here in the language with >> a few changes. I don't know what those changes would be however - >> perhaps we can do more static interpretation of if() clauses: >> if(!thisEnclosingJoinPoint.getPackage().equals(thisJoinPoint.getPackage)) >> or similar. >> > Yes, this would be quite nice. I think there were other static > pointcut enhancements that I came across but can't remember right now. > I'll add an issue with this one, and if I (or anyone) can think of > any, they can add it to the issue. > > Thanks, > Matthew > -- mailto:[email protected] skype:matthewadams12 yahoo:matthewadams aol:matthewadams12 google-talk:[email protected] msn:[email protected] http://matthewadams.me http://www.linkedin.com/in/matthewadams _______________________________________________ aspectj-users mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
