Re: [aspectwerkz-user] proposed syntax: within construct, feedback wanted

So which would you end up with

/**
 * @Around executionPointcut within fooFilter && blahFilter &&
someOtherFilter
*/

or

/**
 * @Around executionPointcut within fooFilter within blahFilter within
someOtherFilter
*/

The first makes some amount of sense. The second has far too many
within's. Not only is there a within keyword for each filter in the
advice selection, but also one for each filter when you declare the
filter! 

Craig

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 00:24:51 +0100, "Alex"
<alex-he/e8N7AIe/[email protected]> wrote:

>almost there
>
>Ideally i d like the "within" operator in the expression language (see
>@Around)
>
>Alex
>
> /**
> * @Within foo.*
> */
>Filter fooFilter; (or Pointcut )
>
> /**
> * @Around executionPointcut within fooFilter
> */
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Craig Fleming" <[email protected]>
>To: <aspectwerkz-devel-81qHHgoATdGxIXFVlbCvtR2eb7JE58TQ@public.gmane.org>
>Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2004 4:04 AM
>Subject: [aspectwerkz-devel] Re: [aspectwerkz-user] proposed syntax: within
>construct, feedback wanted
>
>
>>
>> Oooh. Ok. Let me make sure I got it right:
>>
>> /**
>>  * @Execution foo.*(..)
>> */
>> Pointcut executionPointcut;
>>
>> /**
>>  * @Around executionPointcut && foo.*
>> */
>>
>> Was what you were objecting to, and
>>
>> /**
>>  * @Within foo.*
>> */
>> Filter fooFilter; (or Pointcut)
>>
>> /**
>>  * @Around executionPointcut && fooFilter
>> */
>>
>> Is what you were arguing for? I agree. :)
>>
>> Craig
>>
>> On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 20:41:14 +0100, "Alex"
>> <alex-he/e8N7AIe/[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >Craig
>> >
>> >the && will off course be maintained as well as || and !
>> >and , or , not are just synonyms
>> >as well as AND OR NOT
>> >
>> >I was arguing that "and" (&& / and / AND) is not suitable to express a
>> >"within" concept. It is better to use "within / WITHIN" since the new
>> >implementation (in cvs head) allows this.
>> >[see http://blogs.codehaus.org/people/avasseur ]
>> >
>> >Alex
>> >
>> >----- Original Message -----
>> >From: "Craig Fleming" <[email protected]>
>> >To: <aspectwerkz-devel-81qHHgoATdGxIXFVlbCvtR2eb7JE58TQ@public.gmane.org>
>> >Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 9:46 AM
>> >Subject: [aspectwerkz-devel] Re: [aspectwerkz-user] proposed syntax:
>within
>> >construct, feedback wanted
>> >
>> >
>> >> What's wrong with the && operator? What's better about using 'and' and
>> >> 'or'? Personally, from years of programming I find &&, || more
>> >> readable.
>> >>
>> >> Also there is precedence for having a Pointcut that is not actually a
>> >> pointcut. AspectJ uses args(), target(), this() in multiple contexts.
>> >> Obviously this isn't to be taken as "Do it this way because AspectJ is
>> >> always right." but I figured I'd point it out. :)
>> >>
>> >> Craig
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 00:26:52 -0800 (PST), Jonas "Bonér"
>> >> <jonas_boner-/[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Redirecting to devel ML.
>> >> >
>> >> >This is a great idea, Alex. I like it a lot.
>> >> >
>> >> >Using this approach we could even write it like this:
>> >> >
>> >> >     /**
>> >> >      * @Execution int *..*.get*() within foo.bar..* and not within
>> >foo.bee..*
>> >> >      */
>> >> >     Pointcut withinFooBar;
>> >> >
>> >> >E.g. explicitly.
>> >> >
>> >> >Good, let's settle for 'Filter' instead of 'Pointcut'.
>> >> >I prefer the 'not within' instead of the 'outside'.
>> >> >I do believe that it should be a weave time filtering.
>> >> >
>> >> >Care to put your ideas in JIRA?
>> >> >
>> >> >/Jonas
>> >> >
>> >> >--- Alex <alex-he/e8N7AIe/[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> >> Why use the && operator ?
>> >> >> My new jjtree based impl should allow to easily add the "within"
>> >operator
>> >> >> (and even "outside" if someone needs it or may be better "not within
>X"
>> >=
>> >> >> "within( not (X) )".
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Within will support nested And and nested Or (and not And / not Or)
>to
>> >> >> represent union and intersection [see sample below])
>> >> >> Note also that we might have to solve:
>> >> >>     (pc within X) or (pc2 within Y)
>> >> >> differently from
>> >> >>     pc within X or within Y = pc within (X or Y)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> +1 for using a Filter type field in the aspect, so that we avoid
>> >confusion
>> >> >> with a sort of Class pointcut. But... no way to reuse it as a Class
>> >pointcut
>> >> >> then...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Question: should the within / outside construct be taken into
>account
>> >at
>> >> >> weave time or at joinpoint evaluation time ?
>> >> >> Its more natural to have it at weave time, to fit a finer grained
>> >> >> "transformation scope include / exclude", but it might add more
>dynamic
>> >> >> feature at evaluation time (for the cost of an overhead in out of
>> >scoped
>> >> >> classes). To be in sync with AJ it seems to be weave time.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Alex
>> >> >>
>> >> >> [taken from Jonas' jira sample ]
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >>
>> >> >>     /**
>> >> >>      * @Within foo.bar.*
>> >> >>      */
>> >> >>     Filter withinFooBar;
>> >> >>
>> >> >>     /**
>> >> >>      * @Within foo.bar.bee.*
>> >> >>      */
>> >> >>     Filter withinFooBarBee;
>> >> >>
>> >> >>    /** @Filter special.*    */
>> >> >>    Filter x;
>> >> >>
>> >> >> And then use it to filter on class level in the other pointcut
>> >expressions:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>     /**
>> >> >>      * @Execution int *..*.get*() within (withinFooBar && !
>> >withinFooBarBee)
>> >> >> and not within (x)
>> >> >>      */
>> >> >>     Pointcut withinFooBar;
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> ----- Original Message -----
>> >> >> From: "Jonas Bonér" <jonas_boner-/[email protected]>
>> >> >> To: "Craig Fleming" <[email protected]>;
>> >> >> <aspectwerkz-user-81qHHgoATdGxIXFVlbCvtR2eb7JE58TQ@public.gmane.org>
>> >> >> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 6:36 PM
>> >> >> Subject: [aspectwerkz-user] proposed syntax: within construct,
>feedback
>> >> >> wanted
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Hi guys.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I have sketched some on how to support the within construct.
>Feedback
>> >> >> please.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ViewIssue.jspa?key=AW-119
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > /Jonas
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > --- Craig Fleming <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> >> > > On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 00:24:03 -0800 (PST), Jonas "Bonér"
>> >> >> > > <jonas_boner-/[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > >> 1. I'm trying to use the subtype wildcard on return types.
>> >> >> > > >> @Execution Object *..*.*(..) - works, but isn't what I want
>> >> >> > > >> @Execution Object+ *..*.*(..) - doesn't pick out anything
>> >> >> > > >This is a current limitation in AW. I understand that there is
>a
>> >need
>> >> >> for this and will add it
>> >> >> > > as
>> >> >> > > >soon as I get the time.
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > Cool. A not so efficient way of getting around it is to use
>> >> >> > > @Execution * *..*.*(..)
>> >> >> > > And then filter by
>MethodJoinPoint.getReturnType().isPrimitive().
>> >> >> > > Naturally it would be more efficient if this could be filtered
>out
>> >> >> > > sooner than inside the advice itself, but this works nicely.
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > >You can add within's that is global to the aspect system usint
>> >> >> 'transformation scopes':
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >>
>>
>>>http://aspectwerkz.codehaus.org/definition_issues.html#Transformation%20sc
>o
>> >> >> pes
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > >If there is a high need for it I guess that it would not be a
>> >problem
>> >> >> to make this feature more
>> >> >> > > >fine-grained.
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > May be another feature to add to that ever-extending list of
>yours,
>> >> >> > > but in my particular case the transformation scopes are exactly
>> >what I
>> >> >> > > needed.
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > >It is not possible to advise advices (or aspects). This is a
>> >design
>> >> >> choice and could of course
>> >> >> > > be
>> >> >> > > >discussed. But my belief is that it adds more problems than it
>> >solves.
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > >cflow support was just recently committed to the CVS (couple of
>> >days
>> >> >> ago), it is not supported
>> >> >> > > in
>> >> >> > > >the RC. If you need cflow support before the final 0.9 is
>released
>> >you
>> >> >> have to use CVS HEAD.
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > I was just wondering if I needed to filter out my aspect code,
>as
>> >in
>> >> >> > > AspectJ if you don't, you end up with bigger runtime than you
>> >actually
>> >> >> > > wanted. I am a believer in making the system as flexible as
>> >possible,
>> >> >> > > and then letting the programmer make his or her own decisions.
>> >> >> > > Naturally I'm a Java programmer, and not a C++ programmer (more
>> >> >> > > flexible, but so much more ...ugly), so I don't always stick to
>> >this,
>> >> >> > > but I can't count the number of personal projects where I've
>been
>> >> >> > > thwarted by a final class or private variable. ;)
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > Don't add this one to your list, I'm not making an argument for
>it.
>> >:)
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > Thanks,
>> >> >> > > Craig
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > _______________________________________________
>> >> >> > > aspectwerkz-user mailing list
>> >> >> > > aspectwerkz-user-81qHHgoATdGxIXFVlbCvtR2eb7JE58TQ@public.gmane.org
>> >> >> > > http://lists.codehaus.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectwerkz-user
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > =====
>> >> >> > Jonas
>> >> >> > http://blogs.codehaus.org/people/jboner/
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > __________________________________
>> >> >> > Do you Yahoo!?
>> >> >> > Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
>> >> >> > http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus
>> >> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> >> > aspectwerkz-user mailing list
>> >> >> > aspectwerkz-user-81qHHgoATdGxIXFVlbCvtR2eb7JE58TQ@public.gmane.org
>> >> >> > http://lists.codehaus.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectwerkz-user
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> aspectwerkz-user mailing list
>> >> >> aspectwerkz-user-81qHHgoATdGxIXFVlbCvtR2eb7JE58TQ@public.gmane.org
>> >> >> http://lists.codehaus.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectwerkz-user
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >=====
>> >> >Jonas
>> >> >http://blogs.codehaus.org/people/jboner/
>> >> >
>> >> >__________________________________
>> >> >Do you Yahoo!?
>> >> >Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
>> >> >http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> aspectwerkz-devel mailing list
>> >> aspectwerkz-devel-81qHHgoATdGxIXFVlbCvtR2eb7JE58TQ@public.gmane.org
>> >> http://lists.codehaus.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectwerkz-devel
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> aspectwerkz-devel mailing list
>> aspectwerkz-devel-81qHHgoATdGxIXFVlbCvtR2eb7JE58TQ@public.gmane.org
>> http://lists.codehaus.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectwerkz-devel
>>
>>