View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3820464#3820464
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3820464 explain this to us. 1- you always start the aspect code with invocation.invokeNext(); this reads is if you always invoke the object first so there is nothing you do in a "pre sense". Is that only for this example? 2- I am a little confused on the scope. The aspect defines "my scope" is the VM Then the poincut defines a binding for a method in a class for example. Why the "VM" scoping then? The class scope is confusing still, if you define a pointcut to bind an aspect to a class method, why do you need "scoping". 3- One scoping mechanism that would leverage separate names in the "aspect" and the "poincut" would be application scoping (aka logical scoping). You would define "aspect scope = someName", then define the binding be applied to logical scopes so the matching within the pointcut binding is done on a class method but only those instances that are attached to a given application. Defining "application" relation on instances is going to be a bit trickier. Maybe new() should leverage a "threadlocal" variable that marks belonging to the app. For server side IoC would could automate that in teh same way. ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn _______________________________________________ JBoss-Development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
