aspectsharp-users

Re: [Aspectsharp-users] Proxy generation and non-virtual methods

[Rafael S. <raf...@gm...>]

    Just ignoring the method smells like a strong and cruel decision..
Some logging is not an option? Otherwise, this is the kind of
assumption that must be very clear in the documentation.

Rafael

hammett wrote:

> Hello folks,
>
> I think this is a big big problem. Lets see an example of some pseudo code:
>
> class A
>  int value;
>
>  A()
>    value = 0
>  end
>
>  virtual void method1()
>    value++
>  end
>
>  void method2()
>    value++
>  end
>
>  virtual int getValue1()
>    return value
>  end
>
>  int getValue2()
>    return value
>  end
> end
>
>
> A a = AspectEngine.Wrap( new A() );
> a.method1()
> a.method2()
> a.method1()
>
> Console.Out.Println( a.getValue1() )
> Console.Out.Println( a.getValue2() )
>
> --  What do you think is going to be outputed?
>
> The underlying question is: shall we ignore non-virtual methods during proxy generation?
>
>
> Cheers,
> hammett
>

Re: [Aspectsharp-users] Proxy generation and non-virtual methods

[hammett <ha...@uo...>]

I think that neither logging nor documentation is the solution. I'm in favor 
of raising a nice and clean exception if non-virtual methods are found.

Why:

- People apparently don't read the docs (we dont read them either :-))
- Logging can be easily ignored or even uncatched

What do you think?

Cheers
hammett

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rafael Steil" <raf...@gm...>
To: <asp...@li...>
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2004 8:03 AM
Subject: Re: [Aspectsharp-users] Proxy generation and non-virtual methods


>    Just ignoring the method smells like a strong and cruel decision..
> Some logging is not an option? Otherwise, this is the kind of
> assumption that must be very clear in the documentation.
>
> Rafael
>
> hammett wrote:
>
>> Hello folks,
>>
>> I think this is a big big problem. Lets see an example of some pseudo 
>> code:
>>
>> class A
>>  int value;
>>
>>  A()
>>    value = 0
>>  end
>>
>>  virtual void method1()
>>    value++
>>  end
>>
>>  void method2()
>>    value++
>>  end
>>
>>  virtual int getValue1()
>>    return value
>>  end
>>
>>  int getValue2()
>>    return value
>>  end
>> end
>>
>>
>> A a = AspectEngine.Wrap( new A() );
>> a.method1()
>> a.method2()
>> a.method1()
>>
>> Console.Out.Println( a.getValue1() )
>> Console.Out.Println( a.getValue2() )
>>
>> --  What do you think is going to be outputed?
>>
>> The underlying question is: shall we ignore non-virtual methods during 
>> proxy generation?
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> hammett
>>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal
> Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us
> Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out 
> more
> http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl
> _______________________________________________
> Aspectsharp-users mailing list
> Asp...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/aspectsharp-users 

Re: [Aspectsharp-users] Proxy generation and non-virtual methods

[Rafael S. <raf...@gm...>]

Yeah, loggin is a weak solution, even because I don't think that the
need for a logging library as dependency for a# is good.
Seems like we don't have too many options but thow an exception ..

Rafael


On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 14:54:05 -0700, hammett <ha...@uo...> wrote:
> I think that neither logging nor documentation is the solution. I'm in favor
> of raising a nice and clean exception if non-virtual methods are found.
> 
> Why:
> 
> - People apparently don't read the docs (we dont read them either :-))
> - Logging can be easily ignored or even uncatched
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Cheers
> hammett
>