Many software developers are attracted to the idea of aspect-oriented
programming (AOP) but unsure about how to begin using the
technology. They recognize the concept of crosscutting concerns, and
know that they have had problems with the implementation of such
concerns in the past. But there are many questions about how to adopt
AOP into the development process. Common questions include:
Can I use aspects in my existing code?
What kinds of benefits can I expect to get from using aspects?
How do I find aspects in my programs?
How steep is the learning curve for AOP?
What are the risks of using this new technology?
This chapter addresses these questions in the context of AspectJ: a
general-purpose aspect-oriented extension to Java. A series of
abridged examples illustrate the kinds of aspects programmers may
want to implement using AspectJ and the benefits associated with
doing so. Readers who would like to understand the examples in more
detail, or who want to learn how to program examples like these, can
find more complete examples and supporting material linked from the
AspectJ web site ( http://eclipse.org/aspectj ).
A significant risk in adopting any new technology is going too far
too fast. Concern about this risk causes many organizations to be
conservative about adopting new technology. To address this issue,
the examples in this chapter are grouped into three broad categories,
with aspects that are easier to adopt into existing development
projects coming earlier in this chapter. The next section, Introduction to AspectJ, we present the core of AspectJ's
features, and in Development Aspects, we present
aspects that facilitate tasks such as debugging, testing and
performance tuning of applications. And, in the section following,
Production Aspects, we present aspects that
implement crosscutting functionality common in Java applications. We
will defer discussing a third category of aspects, reusable aspects,
until The AspectJ Language.
These categories are informal, and this ordering is not the only way
to adopt AspectJ. Some developers may want to use a production aspect
right away. But our experience with current AspectJ users suggests
that this is one ordering that allows developers to get experience
with (and benefit from) AOP technology quickly, while also minimizing
risk.
This section presents a brief introduction to the features of AspectJ
used later in this chapter. These features are at the core of the
language, but this is by no means a complete overview of AspectJ.
The features are presented using a simple figure editor system. A
Figure consists of a number of
FigureElements, which can be either
Points or Lines. The
Figure class provides factory services. There
is also a Display. Most example programs later
in this chapter are based on this system as well.
The motivation for AspectJ (and likewise for aspect-oriented
programming) is the realization that there are issues or concerns
that are not well captured by traditional programming
methodologies. Consider the problem of enforcing a security policy in
some application. By its nature, security cuts across many of the
natural units of modularity of the application. Moreover, the
security policy must be uniformly applied to any additions as the
application evolves. And the security policy that is being applied
might itself evolve. Capturing concerns like a security policy in a
disciplined way is difficult and error-prone in a traditional
programming language.
Concerns like security cut across the natural units of
modularity. For object-oriented programming languages, the natural
unit of modularity is the class. But in object-oriented programming
languages, crosscutting concerns are not easily turned into classes
precisely because they cut across classes, and so these aren't
reusable, they can't be refined or inherited, they are spread through
out the program in an undisciplined way, in short, they are difficult
to work with.
Aspect-oriented programming is a way of modularizing crosscutting
concerns much like object-oriented programming is a way of
modularizing common concerns. AspectJ is an implementation of
aspect-oriented programming for Java.
AspectJ adds to Java just one new concept, a join point -- and that's
really just a name for an existing Java concept. It adds to Java
only a few new constructs: pointcuts, advice, inter-type declarations
and aspects. Pointcuts and advice dynamically affect program flow,
inter-type declarations statically affects a program's class
hierarchy, and aspects encapsulate these new constructs.
A join point is a well-defined point in the
program flow. A pointcut picks out certain join
points and values at those points. A piece of
advice is code that is executed when a join
point is reached. These are the dynamic parts of AspectJ.
AspectJ also has different kinds of inter-type
declarations that allow the programmer to modify a
program's static structure, namely, the members of its classes and
the relationship between classes.
AspectJ's aspect are the unit of modularity for
crosscutting concerns. They behave somewhat like Java classes, but
may also include pointcuts, advice and inter-type declarations.
In the sections immediately following, we are first going to look at
join points and how they compose into pointcuts. Then we will look at
advice, the code which is run when a pointcut is reached. We will see
how to combine pointcuts and advice into aspects, AspectJ's reusable,
inheritable unit of modularity. Lastly, we will look at how to use
inter-type declarations to deal with crosscutting concerns of a
program's class structure.
The Dynamic Join Point Model
A critical element in the design of any aspect-oriented language is
the join point model. The join point model provides the common
frame of reference that makes it possible to define the dynamic
structure of crosscutting concerns. This chapter describes
AspectJ's dynamic join points, in which join points are certain
well-defined points in the execution of the program.
AspectJ provides for many kinds of join points, but this chapter
discusses only one of them: method call join points. A method call
join point encompasses the actions of an object receiving a method
call. It includes all the actions that comprise a method call,
starting after all arguments are evaluated up to and including
return (either normally or by throwing an exception).
Each method call at runtime is a different join point, even if it
comes from the same call expression in the program. Many other
join points may run while a method call join point is executing --
all the join points that happen while executing the method body,
and in those methods called from the body. We say that these join
points execute in the dynamic context of the
original call join point.
In AspectJ, pointcuts pick out certain join
points in the program flow. For example, the pointcut
call(void Point.setX(int))
picks out each join point that is a call to a method that has the
signature void Point.setX(int) — that is,
Point's void setX
method with a single int parameter.
A pointcut can be built out of other pointcuts with and, or, and
not (spelled &&, ||,
and !). For example:
call(void Point.setX(int)) ||
call(void Point.setY(int))
picks out each join point that is either a call to
setX or a call to setY.
Pointcuts can identify join points from many different types
— in other words, they can crosscut types. For example,
call(void FigureElement.setXY(int,int)) ||
call(void Point.setX(int)) ||
call(void Point.setY(int)) ||
call(void Line.setP1(Point)) ||
call(void Line.setP2(Point));
picks out each join point that is a call to one of five methods
(the first of which is an interface method, by the way).
In our example system, this pointcut captures all the join points
when a FigureElement moves. While this is a
useful way to specify this crosscutting concern, it is a bit of a
mouthful. So AspectJ allows programmers to define their own named
pointcuts with the pointcut form. So the
following declares a new, named pointcut:
pointcut move():
call(void FigureElement.setXY(int,int)) ||
call(void Point.setX(int)) ||
call(void Point.setY(int)) ||
call(void Line.setP1(Point)) ||
call(void Line.setP2(Point));
and whenever this definition is visible, the programmer can simply
use move() to capture this complicated
pointcut.
The previous pointcuts are all based on explicit enumeration of a
set of method signatures. We sometimes call this
name-based crosscutting. AspectJ also
provides mechanisms that enable specifying a pointcut in terms of
properties of methods other than their exact name. We call this
property-based crosscutting. The simplest of
these involve using wildcards in certain fields of the method
signature. For example, the pointcut
call(void Figure.make*(..))
picks out each join point that's a call to a void method defined
on Figure whose the name begins with
"make" regardless of the method's parameters.
In our system, this picks out calls to the factory methods
makePoint and makeLine.
The pointcut
call(public * Figure.* (..))
picks out each call to Figure's public
methods.
But wildcards aren't the only properties AspectJ supports.
Another pointcut, cflow, identifies join
points based on whether they occur in the dynamic context of
other join points. So
cflow(move())
picks out each join point that occurs in the dynamic context of
the join points picked out by move(), our named
pointcut defined above. So this picks out each join points that
occurrs between when a move method is called and when it returns
(either normally or by throwing an exception).
So pointcuts pick out join points. But they don't
do anything apart from picking out join
points. To actually implement crosscutting behavior, we use
advice. Advice brings together a pointcut (to pick out join
points) and a body of code (to run at each of those join points).
AspectJ has several different kinds of advice. Before
advice runs as a join point is reached, before the
program proceeds with the join point. For example, before advice
on a method call join point runs before the actual method starts
running, just after the arguments to the method call are evaluated.
before(): move() {
System.out.println("about to move");
}
After advice on a particular join point runs
after the program proceeds with that join point. For example,
after advice on a method call join point runs after the method body
has run, just before before control is returned to the caller.
Because Java programs can leave a join point 'normally' or by
throwing an exception, there are three kinds of after advice:
after returning, after
throwing, and plain after (which runs
after returning or throwing, like Java's
finally).
after() returning: move() {
System.out.println("just successfully moved");
}
Around advice on a join point runs as the join
point is reached, and has explicit control over whether the program
proceeds with the join point. Around advice is not discussed in
this section.
Exposing Context in Pointcuts
Pointcuts not only pick out join points, they can also expose
part of the execution context at their join points. Values
exposed by a pointcut can be used in the body of advice
declarations.
An advice declaration has a parameter list (like a method) that
gives names to all the pieces of context that it uses. For
example, the after advice
after(FigureElement fe, int x, int y) returning:
...SomePointcut... {
...SomeBody...
}
uses three pieces of exposed context, a
FigureElement named fe, and two
ints named x and y.
The body of the advice uses the names just like method
parameters, so
after(FigureElement fe, int x, int y) returning:
...SomePointcut... {
System.out.println(fe + " moved to (" + x + ", " + y + ")");
}
The advice's pointcut publishes the values for the advice's
arguments. The three primitive pointcuts
this, target and
args are used to publish these values. So now
we can write the complete piece of advice:
after(FigureElement fe, int x, int y) returning:
call(void FigureElement.setXY(int, int))
&& target(fe)
&& args(x, y) {
System.out.println(fe + " moved to (" + x + ", " + y + ")");
}
The pointcut exposes three values from calls to
setXY: the target
FigureElement -- which it publishes as
fe, so it becomes the first argument to the
after advice -- and the two int arguments -- which it publishes
as x and y, so they become
the second and third argument to the after advice.
So the advice prints the figure element
that was moved and its new x and
y coordinates after each
setXY method call.
A named pointcut may have parameters like a piece of advice.
When the named pointcut is used (by advice, or in another named
pointcut), it publishes its context by name just like the
this, target and
args pointcut. So another way to write the
above advice is
pointcut setXY(FigureElement fe, int x, int y):
call(void FigureElement.setXY(int, int))
&& target(fe)
&& args(x, y);
after(FigureElement fe, int x, int y) returning: setXY(fe, x, y) {
System.out.println(fe + " moved to (" + x + ", " + y + ").");
}
Inter-type declarations in AspectJ are declarations that cut across
classes and their hierarchies. They may declare members that cut
across multiple classes, or change the inheritance relationship
between classes. Unlike advice, which operates primarily
dynamically, introduction operates statically, at compile-time.
Consider the problem of expressing a capability shared by some
existing classes that are already part of a class hierarchy,
i.e. they already extend a class. In Java, one creates an
interface that captures this new capability, and then adds to
each affected class a method that implements
this interface.
AspectJ can express the concern in one place, by using inter-type
declarations. The aspect declares the methods and fields that are
necessary to implement the new capability, and associates the
methods and fields to the existing classes.
Suppose we want to have Screen objects
observe changes to Point objects, where
Point is an existing class. We can implement
this by writing an aspect declaring that the class Point
Point has an instance field,
observers, that keeps track of the
Screen objects that are observing
Points.
aspect PointObserving {
private Vector Point.observers = new Vector();
...
}
The observers field is private, so only
PointObserving can see it. So observers are
added or removed with the static methods
addObserver and
removeObserver on the aspect.
aspect PointObserving {
private Vector Point.observers = new Vector();
public static void addObserver(Point p, Screen s) {
p.observers.add(s);
}
public static void removeObserver(Point p, Screen s) {
p.observers.remove(s);
}
...
}
Along with this, we can define a pointcut
changes that defines what we want to observe,
and the after advice defines what we want to do when we observe a
change.
aspect PointObserving {
private Vector Point.observers = new Vector();
public static void addObserver(Point p, Screen s) {
p.observers.add(s);
}
public static void removeObserver(Point p, Screen s) {
p.observers.remove(s);
}
pointcut changes(Point p): target(p) && call(void Point.set*(int));
after(Point p): changes(p) {
Iterator iter = p.observers.iterator();
while ( iter.hasNext() ) {
updateObserver(p, (Screen)iter.next());
}
}
static void updateObserver(Point p, Screen s) {
s.display(p);
}
}
Note that neither Screen's nor
Point's code has to be modified, and that
all the changes needed to support this new capability are local to
this aspect.
Aspects wrap up pointcuts, advice, and inter-type declarations in a
a modular unit of crosscutting implementation. It is defined very
much like a class, and can have methods, fields, and initializers
in addition to the crosscutting members. Because only aspects may
include these crosscutting members, the declaration of these
effects is localized.
Like classes, aspects may be instantiated, but AspectJ controls how
that instantiation happens -- so you can't use Java's
new form to build new aspect instances. By
default, each aspect is a singleton, so one aspect instance is
created. This means that advice may use non-static fields of the
aspect, if it needs to keep state around:
aspect Logging {
OutputStream logStream = System.err;
before(): move() {
logStream.println("about to move");
}
}
Aspects may also have more complicated rules for instantiation, but
these will be described in a later chapter.
The next two sections present the use of aspects in increasingly
sophisticated ways. Development aspects are easily removed from
production builds. Production aspects are intended to be used in
both development and in production, but tend to affect only a few
classes.
This section presents examples of aspects that can be used during
development of Java applications. These aspects facilitate debugging,
testing and performance tuning work. The aspects define behavior that
ranges from simple tracing, to profiling, to testing of internal
consistency within the application. Using AspectJ makes it possible
to cleanly modularize this kind of functionality, thereby making it
possible to easily enable and disable the functionality when desired.
This first example shows how to increase the visibility of the
internal workings of a program. It is a simple tracing aspect that
prints a message at specified method calls. In our figure editor
example, one such aspect might simply trace whenever points are
drawn.
aspect SimpleTracing {
pointcut tracedCall():
call(void FigureElement.draw(GraphicsContext));
before(): tracedCall() {
System.out.println("Entering: " + thisJoinPoint);
}
}
This code makes use of the thisJoinPoint special
variable. Within all advice bodies this variable is bound to an
object that describes the current join point. The effect of this
code is to print a line like the following every time a figure
element receives a draw method call:
Entering: call(void FigureElement.draw(GraphicsContext))
To understand the benefit of coding this with AspectJ consider
changing the set of method calls that are traced. With AspectJ,
this just requires editing the definition of the
tracedCalls pointcut and recompiling. The
individual methods that are traced do not need to be edited.
When debugging, programmers often invest considerable effort in
figuring out a good set of trace points to use when looking for a
particular kind of problem. When debugging is complete or appears
to be complete it is frustrating to have to lose that investment by
deleting trace statements from the code. The alternative of just
commenting them out makes the code look bad, and can cause trace
statements for one kind of debugging to get confused with trace
statements for another kind of debugging.
With AspectJ it is easy to both preserve the work of designing a
good set of trace points and disable the tracing when it isn t
being used. This is done by writing an aspect specifically for that
tracing mode, and removing that aspect from the compilation when it
is not needed.
This ability to concisely implement and reuse debugging
configurations that have proven useful in the past is a direct
result of AspectJ modularizing a crosscutting design element the
set of methods that are appropriate to trace when looking for a
given kind of information.
Our second example shows you how to do some very specific
profiling. Although many sophisticated profiling tools are
available, and these can gather a variety of information and
display the results in useful ways, you may sometimes want to
profile or log some very specific behavior. In these cases, it is
often possible to write a simple aspect similar to the ones above
to do the job.
For example, the following aspect counts the number of calls to the
rotate method on a Line
and the number of calls to the set* methods of
a Point that happen within the control flow
of those calls to rotate:
aspect SetsInRotateCounting {
int rotateCount = 0;
int setCount = 0;
before(): call(void Line.rotate(double)) {
rotateCount++;
}
before(): call(void Point.set*(int))
&& cflow(call(void Line.rotate(double))) {
setCount++;
}
}
In effect, this aspect allows the programmer to ask very specific
questions like
How many times is the rotate
method defined on Line objects called?
and
How many times are methods defined on
Point objects whose name begins with
"set" called in fulfilling those rotate
calls?
questions it may be difficult to express using standard
profiling or logging tools.
Many programmers use the "Design by Contract" style popularized by
Bertand Meyer in Object-Oriented Software Construction,
2/e. In this style of programming, explicit
pre-conditions test that callers of a method call it properly and
explicit post-conditions test that methods properly do the work
they are supposed to.
AspectJ makes it possible to implement pre- and post-condition
testing in modular form. For example, this code
aspect PointBoundsChecking {
pointcut setX(int x):
(call(void FigureElement.setXY(int, int)) && args(x, *))
|| (call(void Point.setX(int)) && args(x));
pointcut setY(int y):
(call(void FigureElement.setXY(int, int)) && args(*, y))
|| (call(void Point.setY(int)) && args(y));
before(int x): setX(x) {
if ( x < MIN_X || x > MAX_X )
throw new IllegalArgumentException("x is out of bounds.");
}
before(int y): setY(y) {
if ( y < MIN_Y || y > MAX_Y )
throw new IllegalArgumentException("y is out of bounds.");
}
}
implements the bounds checking aspect of pre-condition testing for
operations that move points. Notice that the
setX pointcut refers to all the operations
that can set a Point's x coordinate; this
includes the setX method, as well as half of
the setXY method. In this sense the
setX pointcut can be seen as involving very
fine-grained crosscutting — it names the the
setX method and half of the
setXY method.
Even though pre- and post-condition testing aspects can often be
used only during testing, in some cases developers may wish to
include them in the production build as well. Again, because
AspectJ makes it possible to modularize these crosscutting concerns
cleanly, it gives developers good control over this decision.
The property-based crosscutting mechanisms can be very useful in
defining more sophisticated contract enforcement. One very powerful
use of these mechanisms is to identify method calls that, in a
correct program, should not exist. For example, the following
aspect enforces the constraint that only the well-known factory
methods can add an element to the registry of figure
elements. Enforcing this constraint ensures that no figure element
is added to the registry more than once.
aspect RegistrationProtection {
pointcut register(): call(void Registry.register(FigureElement));
pointcut canRegister(): withincode(static * FigureElement.make*(..));
before(): register() && !canRegister() {
throw new IllegalAccessException("Illegal call " + thisJoinPoint);
}
}
This aspect uses the withincode primitive pointcut to denote all
join points that occur within the body of the factory methods on
FigureElement (the methods with names that
begin with "make"). This is a property-based
pointcut because it identifies join points based not on their
signature, but rather on the property that they occur specifically
within the code of another method. The before advice declaration
effectively says signal an error for any calls to register that are
not within the factory methods.
This advice throws a runtime exception at certain join points, but
AspectJ can do better. Using the declare error
form, we can have the compiler signal the
error.
aspect RegistrationProtection {
pointcut register(): call(void Registry.register(FigureElement));
pointcut canRegister(): withincode(static * FigureElement.make*(..));
declare error: register() && !canRegister(): "Illegal call"
}
When using this aspect, it is impossible for the compiler to
compile programs with these illegal calls. This early detection is
not always possible. In this case, since we depend only on static
information (the withincode pointcut picks out
join points totally based on their code, and the
call pointcut here picks out join points
statically). Other enforcement, such as the precondition
enforcement, above, does require dynamic information such as the
runtime value of parameters.
Configuration management for aspects can be handled using a variety
of make-file like techniques. To work with optional aspects, the
programmer can simply define their make files to either include the
aspect in the call to the AspectJ compiler or not, as desired.
Developers who want to be certain that no aspects are included in
the production build can do so by configuring their make files so
that they use a traditional Java compiler for production builds. To
make it easy to write such make files, the AspectJ compiler has a
command-line interface that is consistent with ordinary Java
compilers.
This section presents examples of aspects that are inherently
intended to be included in the production builds of an application.
Production aspects tend to add functionality to an application
rather than merely adding more visibility of the internals of a
program. Again, we begin with name-based aspects and follow with
property-based aspects. Name-based production aspects tend to
affect only a small number of methods. For this reason, they are a
good next step for projects adopting AspectJ. But even though they
tend to be small and simple, they can often have a significant
effect in terms of making the program easier to understand and
maintain.
The first example production aspect shows how one might implement
some simple functionality where it is problematic to try and do it
explicitly. It supports the code that refreshes the display. The
role of the aspect is to maintain a dirty bit indicating whether or
not an object has moved since the last time the display was
refreshed.
Implementing this functionality as an aspect is straightforward.
The testAndClear method is called by the
display code to find out whether a figure element has moved
recently. This method returns the current state of the dirty flag
and resets it to false. The pointcut move
captures all the method calls that can move a figure element. The
after advice on move sets the dirty flag
whenever an object moves.
aspect MoveTracking {
private static boolean dirty = false;
public static boolean testAndClear() {
boolean result = dirty;
dirty = false;
return result;
}
pointcut move():
call(void FigureElement.setXY(int, int)) ||
call(void Line.setP1(Point)) ||
call(void Line.setP2(Point)) ||
call(void Point.setX(int)) ||
call(void Point.setY(int));
after() returning: move() {
dirty = true;
}
}
Even this simple example serves to illustrate some of the important
benefits of using AspectJ in production code. Consider implementing
this functionality with ordinary Java: there would likely be a
helper class that contained the dirty flag, the
testAndClear method, as well as a
setFlag method. Each of the methods that could
move a figure element would include a call to the
setFlag method. Those calls, or rather the
concept that those calls should happen at each move operation, are
the crosscutting concern in this case.
The AspectJ implementation has several advantages over the standard
implementation:
The structure of the crosscutting concern is captured
explicitly. The moves pointcut clearly states all the
methods involved, so the programmer reading the code sees not just
individual calls to setFlag, but instead sees
the real structure of the code. The IDE support included with
AspectJ automatically reminds the programmer that this aspect
advises each of the methods involved. The IDE support also
provides commands to jump to the advice from the method and
vice-versa.
Evolution is easier. If, for example, the
aspect needs to be revised to record not just that some figure
element moved, but rather to record exactly which figure elements
moved, the change would be entirely local to the aspect. The
pointcut would be updated to expose the object being moved, and the
advice would be updated to record that object. The paper
An Overview of AspectJ (available linked off
of the AspectJ web site -- http://eclipse.org/aspectj), presented at ECOOP
2001, presents a detailed discussion of various ways this aspect
could be expected to evolve.
The functionality is easy to plug in and out.
Just as with development aspects, production aspects may need to be
removed from the system, either because the functionality is no
longer needed at all, or because it is not needed in certain
configurations of a system. Because the functionality is
modularized in a single aspect this is easy to do.
The implementation is more stable. If, for
example, the programmer adds a subclass of
Line that overrides the existing methods,
this advice in this aspect will still apply. In the ordinary Java
implementation the programmer would have to remember to add the
call to setFlag in the new overriding
method. This benefit is often even more compelling for
property-based aspects (see the section Providing Consistent Behavior).
The crosscutting structure of context passing can be a significant
source of complexity in Java programs. Consider implementing
functionality that would allow a client of the figure editor (a
program client rather than a human) to set the color of any figure
elements that are created. Typically this requires passing a color,
or a color factory, from the client, down through the calls that
lead to the figure element factory. All programmers are familiar
with the inconvenience of adding a first argument to a number of
methods just to pass this kind of context information.
Using AspectJ, this kind of context passing can be implemented in a
modular way. The following code adds after advice that runs only
when the factory methods of Figure are
called in the control flow of a method on a
ColorControllingClient.
aspect ColorControl {
pointcut CCClientCflow(ColorControllingClient client):
cflow(call(* * (..)) && target(client));
pointcut make(): call(FigureElement Figure.make*(..));
after (ColorControllingClient c) returning (FigureElement fe):
make() && CCClientCflow(c) {
fe.setColor(c.colorFor(fe));
}
}
This aspect affects only a small number of methods, but note that
the non-AOP implementation of this functionality might require
editing many more methods, specifically, all the methods in the
control flow from the client to the factory. This is a benefit
common to many property-based aspects while the aspect is short and
affects only a modest number of benefits, the complexity the aspect
saves is potentially much larger.
Providing Consistent Behavior
This example shows how a property-based aspect can be used to
provide consistent handling of functionality across a large set of
operations. This aspect ensures that all public methods of the
com.bigboxco package log any Errors they throw
to their caller (in Java, an Error is like an Exception, but it
indicates that something really bad and usually unrecoverable has
happened). The publicMethodCall pointcut
captures the public method calls of the package, and the after
advice runs whenever one of those calls throws an Error. The advice
logs that Error and then the throw resumes.
aspect PublicErrorLogging {
Log log = new Log();
pointcut publicMethodCall():
call(public * com.bigboxco.*.*(..));
after() throwing (Error e): publicMethodCall() {
log.write(e);
}
}
In some cases this aspect can log an exception twice. This happens
if code inside the com.bigboxco package itself
calls a public method of the package. In that case this code will
log the error at both the outermost call into the
com.bigboxco package and the re-entrant
call. The cflow primitive pointcut can be used
in a nice way to exclude these re-entrant calls:
after() throwing (Error e):
publicMethodCall() && !cflow(publicMethodCall()) {
log.write(e);
}
The following aspect is taken from work on the AspectJ compiler.
The aspect advises about 35 methods in the
JavaParser class. The individual methods
handle each of the different kinds of elements that must be
parsed. They have names like parseMethodDec,
parseThrows, and
parseExpr.
aspect ContextFilling {
pointcut parse(JavaParser jp):
call(* JavaParser.parse*(..))
&& target(jp)
&& !call(Stmt parseVarDec(boolean)); // var decs
// are tricky
around(JavaParser jp) returns ASTObject: parse(jp) {
Token beginToken = jp.peekToken();
ASTObject ret = proceed(jp);
if (ret != null) jp.addContext(ret, beginToken);
return ret;
}
}
This example exhibits a property found in many aspects with large
property-based pointcuts. In addition to a general property based
pattern call(* JavaParser.parse*(..)) it
includes an exception to the pattern !call(Stmt
parseVarDec(boolean)). The exclusion of
parseVarDec happens because the parsing of
variable declarations in Java is too complex to fit with the clean
pattern of the other parse* methods. Even with
the explicit exclusion this aspect is a clear expression of a clean
crosscutting modularity. Namely that all
parse* methods that return
ASTObjects, except for
parseVarDec share a common behavior for
establishing the parse context of their result.
The process of writing an aspect with a large property-based
pointcut, and of developing the appropriate exceptions can clarify
the structure of the system. This is especially true, as in this
case, when refactoring existing code to use aspects. When we first
looked at the code for this aspect, we were able to use the IDE
support provided in AJDE for JBuilder to see what methods the
aspect was advising compared to our manual coding. We quickly
discovered that there were a dozen places where the aspect advice
was in effect but we had not manually inserted the required
functionality. Two of these were bugs in our prior non-AOP
implementation of the parser. The other ten were needless
performance optimizations. So, here, refactoring the code to
express the crosscutting structure of the aspect explicitly made
the code more concise and eliminated latent bugs.