Hi, > Why don't you create some developer documentation so that it's easier for people to help you.
I think you know what I'll say here: time. I'll try and find some to improve the situation - there are docs (e.g. http://www.eclipse.org/aspectj/doc/released/faq.php#q:buildingsource ) but they haven't had any love in a while. I agree that of course it would help. Mostly those keen enough to contribute actually ask me and I email them the basics of what they need, I just don't find the time to nicely integrate that into the docs. > I think that at least a document that explains how to build AspectJ is gonna be very useful. Here is what I sent to the last person that asked: Building it: - go into the 'build' module - copy sample.local.properties as local.properties, edit it if you want particular version stamps. - run 'ant' to build it - the output appears in a new directory at the org.aspectj level called 'aj-build'. In 'dist' is a distribution all packaged. In 'dist/tools/lib' are the individual jars like weaver. That doesn't run the tests though, untangling how that happens is trickier. I typically run them all in eclipse (RunTheseBeforeYouCommitTests). In keeping with having limited time the build process is a little antiquated. Per http://www.eclipse.org/aspectj/doc/released/faq.php#q:buildingsourceyou effectively: git clone, import all the projects, set the missing environment variables and you are good to go (it'll build and tests should be runnable). I'm annoyed we don't have nice OSGi manifests too - a few issues exist around on that: https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=338034 If you think you'll have time to help with issues like the OSGi manifests, I'll really try and find the time to get the docs correct? cheers, Andy On 8 January 2013 03:45, M. P. <free...@abv.bg> wrote: > Hi Andy, > thanks for your answer. > I spent a couple of hours looking at the weaver source code yesterday. At > first it seemed relatively clear how to detect arithmetic instructions but > when I continued I realized that adding a join point is going to be a > shotgun surgery. > Apparently you're the only one who does something for AspectJ, aren't you? > At least that's what the commit messages suggest. Why don't you create some > developer documentation so that it's easier for people to help you. I think > that at least a document that explains how to build AspectJ is gonna be > very useful. And if you add a couple more documents explaining what's what > and where plus some architectural description AspectJ may get alot more > attention. > For instance I'm annoyed with the fact that aspectjrt.jar does not have a > valid OSGi manifest. If it was easier for me to setup an AspectJ > development environment I could have created, tested and sent you a patch > for that. And that's the smallest thing. The next thing I would do is to > make declare error/warning conditional on e.g. system properties. I cannot > do it right now because I'm not confident I know enough about the system in > order to do it properly. > What do you think? > > Thanks. > MP > > > The arithmetic instructions could be surfaced as join points. e.g. > iadd/isub/dadd/lsub/etc. Join points are really just a manifestation of a > bytecode instruction. However, these instructions operate on the stack and > AspectJ does not track who put what on the stack, so in the pointcut/advice > you would be able to receive the operand values but you wouldn't be able > to, for example "match when anything is added to i" because when the join > point is constructed we don't know that 'i' is on the stack. And matching > based on specific values would usually need to be a done with an inserted > dynamic test, because we don't statically know what is on the stack, e.g. > "match when anything has 5 added to it" (possible exceptions could be when > low number constants are used and so the bytecode has one operand encoded > in it, e.g. iadd_1) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Implementation: only a few days to get something hanging together > but a lot longer to get it meshing consistently with all the other language > constructs. There would be a need to define what every pointcut designator > means when it hits an arithmetic join point. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Adding join points is a serious business though as it can cause > issues for anyone upgrading to new versions of AspectJ. Their older > aspects may suddenly start matching on unintended join points. I think > those most recently added were for array construction and those are still > protected with an option flag to turn them on (for the very reason that old > aspects don't trip over them). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As Alexander says, you can be at the mercy of what the compiler > chooses to do in terms of optimization but this isn't anything particularly > new, there are cases of this already here and there. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is it on the roadmap? Not at the moment. We have things like proper > handling of invokedynamic and the incoming Java8 language features to worry > about. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cheers, > > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 7 January 2013 03:52, Alexander Kriegisch > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Maybe you should have a look into other bytecode instrumentation > frameworks such as BCEL, if you need to work on such a low level of > granularity. The effort should be justifiedmfor you if you do have a real > world use case and cannot solve it in another way. Good luck! > > > > > > Alexander Kriegisch > > > > > > Am 07.01.2013 um 12:46 schrieb "M. P." < > > > free...@abv.bg>: > > > > > > > > > > > > >> There is no operator overloading in Java. It is implemented > in other JVM languages like Scala, but this is a bit off-topic here. > > > > > > > > > > > >> BTW, I did not say it was impossible, just that it will > probably never happen in AspectJ. ;) What you show is normal method > interception, not operator interception. Smthe example is not really > relevant. Besides, you never know what a compiler might do with arithmetic > operations optimisation-wise. Multiplication by powers of 2 might get > replaced by left-shift operations (just making up an example). I do not > even say that what you suggest might not be useful in so e rare and special > cases, I just think it is way to fine-granular for AOP purposes. I think > your example is rather academic than useful in daily work. > > > > > > > > > > > >> Alexander Kriegisch > > > > > > > > > > > >> Am 07.01.2013 um 10:34 schrieb "M. P." : > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> For example I'd like to be able to select integer > subtraction: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> Integer i = 5; > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> Integer j = 2; > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> Integer r = i - j; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> Maybe if Java supported operator overloading that would be > fairly easy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> 1. So is something like this possible now? I'm pretty sure > it is not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> You are right, it is not possible. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> 2. Would this be possible to implement? How? Effort? > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> 3. Is something like this planned for future AspectJ > versions? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> I cannot speak for the developers, but I do not think you > will ever see this feature in AspectJ. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> Regards > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> I'm not sure I see why not. Please consider the following > example: > > > > > > > > > > > >>> public aspect StringConcat { > > > > > > > >>> public pointcut concat() : call(* > java.lang.StringBuffer.append(..)); > > > > > > > > > > > >>> before() : concat() { > > > > > > > >>> System.out.println("About to concatenate!"); > > > > > > > >>> } > > > > > > > >>> } > > > > > > > > > > > >>> public class Tester { > > > > > > > > > > > >>> public static void main(String[] args) { > > > > > > > >>> String a = "a"; > > > > > > > >>> String b = "b"; > > > > > > > >>> System.out.println(a + b); > > > > > > > >>> } > > > > > > > >>> } > > > > > > > > > > > >>> When main() is executed the result is: > > > > > > > >>> ======================= > > > > > > > >>> About to concatenate! > > > > > > > >>> ab > > > > > > > >>> ======================= > > > > > > > > > > > >>> So we actually have a real example where the + operator is > overloaded and the resulting code is directly in the client byte code. > > > > > > > >>> Now I'm not too familiar with the Java byte code spec but I > don't see why the same cannot be done for e.g. Integer or event the > primitive types? > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Thank you. > > > > > > > > > > > >>> MP > > > > > > > > > > > > A quick look at the Java byte code format reveals that it > doesn't even have to be done via operator overloading. There is a separate > instruction for each operation. The instruction for method invokation works > similarly to the instruction for integer division so it doesn't seem > problematic to add arithmetic operations as join points. Of course all of > this is just guessing. Perhaps AspectJ developers can clarify a bit? > > > > As to the statement that this example is rather academic...I > could come up with a case where this has a real world value. > > > > Suppose arithmetic join points were supported by AspectJ. This > would make possible for aspects that could prevent overflows. As you know > Java allows silent overflows. What if AspectJ could prevent that? > > > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > MP > > _______________________________________________ > 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
