RE: some questions about the 0.3 / 0.4 codeline

Yeah, you should probably try to move away from the
c.t.n.definition-classes. The AspectInstance/MixinInstance has a similar
API although you'll find it to be more flexible. The main difference is
that you'll need to create a new AspectInstance for every instance you
create and then invoke getProxy() to get the proxy for this instance
only. But I guess you've got a factory somewhere where this is done in a
central place (if not, I suggest you do that :-). 

The new c.t.n.config-stuff is not really ready and a lot of things will
probably happen there. The main purpose is to have Aspect/J-semantics in
Nanning where cross-cutting concerns are truly modular, ie. mixins and
interceptors are tied together into a single aspect. There's a
description about it here:
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=1621907&forum_id=
12937

I'm using it myself and it's very powerful, but it's not very
well-documented and kind of weird sometimes. If you want to use it I can
answer questions you may have.

(c.t.n.definition-classes is in fact implemented on top of the
AspectInstance stuff.)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:nanning-
> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Steve Conover
> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2003 10:55 PM
> To: nanning-developer
> Subject: [Nanning-developer] some questions about the 0.3 / 0.4
codeline
> 
> Jon,
> 
> I'm just integrating the 0.4 codeline into my project, and had a few
> questions.
> 
> My aspects are still working due to this code in
> AspectDefinition.checkObject:
> 
> if (target == null) {
>             return;
>         }
> 
> However I still would like to provide a target that doesn't implement
> the interfaceClass, as we discussed earlier.  That's not really
> possible via the AspectDefinition.
> 
> I remember you said something about extending MixinInstance (which I
> notice is final).  However I guess I haven't been keeping up with
> changes very well - what are the purposes of these new config classes
> (Pointcut, Advise, MixinAspect, etc)?
> 
> I'm defining these AspectDefinitions, and then building up an
> AspectClass and instanciating that to create my objects.  Should I be
> moving this stuff to MixinXXX?
> 
> Regards,
> Steve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> Welcome to geek heaven.
> http://thinkgeek.com/sf
> _______________________________________________
> Nanning-developer mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nanning-developer



-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf