I accept the need for the restriction - in fact that is what we did. I just
wanted a fuller understanding of what was happening here
On 6 December 2012 14:52, Frank Pavageau wrote:
> 2012/12/6 James Cook
>
>> after() throwing(MyRuntimeException ex) : call (* *(..))
>>
> [...]
>
>> Is this
2012/12/6 James Cook
> after() throwing(MyRuntimeException ex) : call (* *(..))
>
[...]
> Is this down to how AspectJ inspects for which methods are eligible? In
> other words is this expected behaviour for RuntimeException child classes?
> Currently using 1.6.12 with Java 1.7_09.
>
AFAIK,
Hi Everyone,
This is my first email to this group so apologises if I violate any
expected etiquette rules. I have searched for an answer for the following
and have not discovered anything.
The problem I currently would like to understand is how AspectJ handles
"After Throws" aspects with a subcla
