Ain't that a gotcha for someone who has used AspectJ for a few years and thought he knew a little something about it? You never cease to amaze me with your teachings, thank you so much. :-)
-- Alexander Kriegisch https://scrum-master.de Andrew Clement: > From what I recall the visibility is expressed with respect to the > aspect - so indeed the class can’t see it. I don’t *think* that > used to work. > > This is from a time I think when we were more purist about aspects - > and perhaps it is being a bit too strict these days - when what you > really want to do is add a new private field to a type, you can’t. > Perhaps there is another visibility to be expressed ‘private to the > target and the aspect’ (private shared?). > > >> Alexander Kriegisch: >> >> I might remember wrong, but I think this used to work at some point >> in the past, or at least it should. But before I file a Bugzilla >> ticket, I would like to have your opinion, Andy. Declaring something >> like >> >> private int MyClass.myField = 0; >> >> private int Account.getMyField() { >> return myField; >> } >> >> basically works and the aspect itself can access the field and the >> method. But the class they are declared on cannot and Ajc says: >> >> [error] The method getMyField() from the type MyClass is not visible >> >> For a full MCVE which you can just copy & paste and for my other >> findings, please see my answer here: >> >> https://stackoverflow.com/a/61450184/1082681 _______________________________________________ aspectj-users mailing list aspectj-users@eclipse.org To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users