Hi Andy, One may solve the problem through the introduction of annotations @Setter and @Getter, which admittedly also makes the code more expressive.
Regards, Manuel On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 15:51, Andy Clement <andrew.clem...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi John, > > Basically you are interested in a set() or a get() when it is not > withincode() of a getter or setter (or likely constructor). > > The problem is that you can't tie the methods name and the fields name > together, so you either have to specify a completely wild policy: > > declare warning: get(* X.*) && !withincode(* get*(..)): "Use the > getter to access fields on type X"; > (which may warn on things you don't mind about) > > or specify a warning per field: > > declare warning: get(* X.foo) && !withincode(* X.getFoo(..)): "Use > getFoo() to access the foo field"; > > As I say you may need to add an extra clause to ignore constructors > since field initialization will typically done there. > > cheers > Andy > > On 15 May 2011 04:08, John <rohanbha...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> I have a doubt again. >> >> I need to enforce a policy that issues a warning when a variable's value is >> accessed without using its corresponding setters and getters..... >> >> Not even sure where to start on this one.... >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://aspectj.2085585.n4.nabble.com/Policy-enforcement-for-setter-and-getter-methods-aspectj-tp3524161p3524161.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 >> > _______________________________________________ > aspectj-users mailing list > aspectj-users@eclipse.org > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users > -- http://www.mmsequeira.pro/ _______________________________________________ aspectj-users mailing list aspectj-users@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users