113723/index.html - gerrit/www.eclipse.org/ajdt - Git at Google

 <!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
 <html>
 <head>
 <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
 <title>AspectJ Development Tools</title>
 <link rel="stylesheet" href="http://www.eclipse.org/default_style.css" type="text/css">
 </head>
 <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">

 <h2>Additional Crosscutting Comparison functionality</h2>

 <p>
   The following new features are available in development builds
   1.4.0.20060228083332 or later, for Eclipse 3.2M5a.
 </p>

 <p>
   A <b>Propagate Up</b> toggle button has been added to the Crosscutting
   Comparison view. The sources and targets of relationships shown in the view
   can be methods, types, and join points within methods, such as calls to
   other methods and catch blocks. Pressing the toggle button increases
   the level of granularity by replacing these sub-method elements with their
   enclosing method. This means that a comparison between two locations
   within the same method would normally show as a difference, but with the
   toggle selected, they would be considered the same.
 </p>

 <p>
   The original crosscutting comparison functionality allows comparison
   between two projects (or more usually two versions of the same project).
   It is now possible to compare two elements within the same project. These
   elements can be either advice statements or declare error/warning statements.
   For example, to see whether two advice statements affect the same
   locations, select them both in the outline view (or package explorer) and select
   <b>Comparing Crosscutting With &gt; Each Other</b> from the context-menu.
 </p>
 <img src="arv1.png" width="425" height="354"
 alt="Screenshot showing the compare menu">

 <p>
   The Crosscutting Comparison view will then show the differences between
   the locations affected. One use of this would be when refactoring a
   pointcut from one which lists the join points to match individually, to
   one which attempts to match the same join points but with a more robust
   property-based pointcut.
 </p>
 <img src="arv2.png" width="612" height="162"
 alt="Screenshot showing the results of comparing two advice elements">

 <p>
   You can also compare two declare error/warning statements, or
   compare one declare statement with an advice statement. This second
   combination can be particularly useful when refactoring code to
   use aspects. You might first use a declare warning statement to identify
   behaviour that is going to be handled by an aspect, such as certain
   calls to a method. You then write some advice to capture that policy,
   by advising the relevant methods. But you need to check that the advice is
   accurate, in that it affects the same locations identified by the declare
   warning. Such a comparison might look like this:
 </p>
 <img src="arv3.png" width="612" height="162"
 alt="Screenshot showing the results of comparing declare warning with advice">

 <p>
   On its own this is not that useful (particularly when the number of advised
   locations is large), because the declare warning targets
   specific method calls, but the advice targets the execution of methods,
   so they all appear as differences in the comparison. This is where the
   <b>Propagate Up</b> button comes in! By selecting this the granularity
   of comparison is raised to the level of enclosing methods. This makes
   the significant difference between the two elements clear:
 </p>
 <img src="arv4.png" width="612" height="162"
 alt="Screenshot showing the results after propagating up to enclosing methods">

 <p>
   This shows that the declare warning affects a method (in this case it is
   a method call within that method) which is not also affected by the after
   advice. Naturally comparisons like this are most useful with large projects,
   where the crosscutting is more wide-spread.
 </p>

 <p>
   <b>Note:</b> We are very grateful to Charles Zhang, Irum Godil,
   and Arno Jacobsen of the Middleware Systems Research Group at the University
   of Toronto for contributing this functionality, as part of their
   research into "Aspect Refactoring Verification" sponsored by the IBM
   CAS fellowship.
 </p>

 <p>
   Note that the crosscutting comparison view is not available for
   AJDT versions 1.6 and later.
 </p>
 </body>
 </html>
	<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
	<html>
	<head>
	<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
	<title>AspectJ Development Tools</title>
	<link rel="stylesheet" href="http://www.eclipse.org/default_style.css" type="text/css">
	</head>
	<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">

	<h2>Additional Crosscutting Comparison functionality</h2>

	<p>
	The following new features are available in development builds
	1.4.0.20060228083332 or later, for Eclipse 3.2M5a.
	</p>

	<p>
	A <b>Propagate Up</b> toggle button has been added to the Crosscutting
	Comparison view. The sources and targets of relationships shown in the view
	can be methods, types, and join points within methods, such as calls to
	other methods and catch blocks. Pressing the toggle button increases
	the level of granularity by replacing these sub-method elements with their
	enclosing method. This means that a comparison between two locations
	within the same method would normally show as a difference, but with the
	toggle selected, they would be considered the same.
	</p>

	<p>
	The original crosscutting comparison functionality allows comparison
	between two projects (or more usually two versions of the same project).
	It is now possible to compare two elements within the same project. These
	elements can be either advice statements or declare error/warning statements.
	For example, to see whether two advice statements affect the same
	locations, select them both in the outline view (or package explorer) and select
	<b>Comparing Crosscutting With > Each Other</b> from the context-menu.
	</p>
	<img src="arv1.png" width="425" height="354"
	alt="Screenshot showing the compare menu">

	<p>
	The Crosscutting Comparison view will then show the differences between
	the locations affected. One use of this would be when refactoring a
	pointcut from one which lists the join points to match individually, to
	one which attempts to match the same join points but with a more robust
	property-based pointcut.
	</p>
	<img src="arv2.png" width="612" height="162"
	alt="Screenshot showing the results of comparing two advice elements">

	<p>
	You can also compare two declare error/warning statements, or
	compare one declare statement with an advice statement. This second
	combination can be particularly useful when refactoring code to
	use aspects. You might first use a declare warning statement to identify
	behaviour that is going to be handled by an aspect, such as certain
	calls to a method. You then write some advice to capture that policy,
	by advising the relevant methods. But you need to check that the advice is
	accurate, in that it affects the same locations identified by the declare
	warning. Such a comparison might look like this:
	</p>
	<img src="arv3.png" width="612" height="162"
	alt="Screenshot showing the results of comparing declare warning with advice">

	<p>
	On its own this is not that useful (particularly when the number of advised
	locations is large), because the declare warning targets
	specific method calls, but the advice targets the execution of methods,
	so they all appear as differences in the comparison. This is where the
	<b>Propagate Up</b> button comes in! By selecting this the granularity
	of comparison is raised to the level of enclosing methods. This makes
	the significant difference between the two elements clear:
	</p>
	<img src="arv4.png" width="612" height="162"
	alt="Screenshot showing the results after propagating up to enclosing methods">

	<p>
	This shows that the declare warning affects a method (in this case it is
	a method call within that method) which is not also affected by the after
	advice. Naturally comparisons like this are most useful with large projects,
	where the crosscutting is more wide-spread.
	</p>

	<p>
	<b>Note:</b> We are very grateful to Charles Zhang, Irum Godil,
	and Arno Jacobsen of the Middleware Systems Research Group at the University
	of Toronto for contributing this functionality, as part of their
	research into "Aspect Refactoring Verification" sponsored by the IBM
	CAS fellowship.
	</p>

	<p>
	Note that the crosscutting comparison view is not available for
	AJDT versions 1.6 and later.
	</p>
	</body>
	</html>