Hi thanks! so it seems for Q1, it's apsecJ's limitation.
Thank you for the information :)
I'll post Q2 question in another thread.
Regards!
--
View this message in context:
http://aspectj.2085585.n4.nabble.com/Behaviours-of-new-constructor-added-by-AspectJ-ITD-tp4651015p4651028.html
Sent fro
It seems *super.someMethod()* can not be correctly resolved in the
constructor added by ITD
It can be compiled with no problem, but* at runtime, exception is raised.*
The class which I'll add a new constructor to:
*public class Child extends Parent{
public String name = "John"
Thank you both for the very helpful suggestions.
It appears that the following simple pattern works, and there is no need to
use ProceedingJoinPoint:
Object around(final Object obj) : somePointCut(obj) {
// Prepare for execution
final Callable action = new Callable() {
ProceedingJoinPoint is only necessary with @AspectJ syntax, not with native
syntax.
Alexander Kriegisch
Am 17.07.2013 um 17:29 schrieb Archie Cobbs :
> Thank you both for the very helpful suggestions.
>
> It appears that the following simple pattern works, and there is no need to
> use Proce
There seems to be a bug in the AspectJ compiler.
With your code as is, I see the same error, but there is also a warning ("-
inter-type constructor does not contain explicit constructor call: field
initializers in the target type will not be executed
[Xlint:noExplicitConstructorCall]". Then I modi
Thanks a lot!
I'll provide info about my environment and try to file a bug
Really thank you for spending time in my questions.
Cheers!
--
View this message in context:
http://aspectj.2085585.n4.nabble.com/ITD-constructor-access-methods-defined-in-super-class-tp4651029p4651033.html
Sent from
