Fair enough.  I entered an issue for tracking purposes:
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=419038


On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Andy Clement <[email protected]>wrote:

> if(true)/if(false) requires no grammar change.  true/false requires
> grammar changes, which *greatly* increase the size of the work.
>
> Andy
>
>
> On 9 October 2013 14:40, Matthew Adams <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> That's correct:  if() is disallowed in DE/DW.  Further, though, the form
>> "if(true)" seem nonintuitive; is there room also for simply "true" &
>> "false"?
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 1:59 AM, Andy Clement <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> > Is there a type expression meaning "true" or "false"?
>>>
>>> The pointcut component you could use is if(true) or if(false). Which I
>>> know internally are optimized to true/false - but I think the declare
>>> warning checking code currently polices that you can't use if  in deow - it
>>> should probably make an exception for if(true)/if(false) because we know
>>> they are special.
>>>
>>> Andy
>>>
>>>
>>> On 8 October 2013 11:55, Matthew Adams <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is there a type expression meaning "true" or "false"?  What I'd like is
>>>> to be able to use the primitive literal values "true" & "false" in a type
>>>> expression.  I'd like to replace the use of Bool in the example below with
>>>> the literals.
>>>>
>>>> public final aspect Bool {
>>>>   public static final pointcut true_(): within(*);
>>>>   public static final pointcut false_(): !true_();
>>>> }
>>>> =====
>>>> public abstract aspect Super {
>>>>
>>>>   public abstract pointcut qualifyingUsage();
>>>>
>>>>   public pointcut warnOnBadUseOfAnnotation():  Bool.false_();
>>>>
>>>>   declare warning:
>>>>     warnOnBadUseOfAnnotation() && qualifyingUsage():
>>>>     "incorrect usage of annotation";
>>>> }
>>>> =====
>>>> public aspect Sub {
>>>>   public warnOnBadUseOfAnnotation():  Bool.true_();
>>>>
>>>>   public pointcut qualifyingUsage():
>>>>     @NotSerializable Serializable+;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> -matthew
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>
>>>> skype:matthewadams12
>>>> googletalk:[email protected]
>>>> http://matthewadams.me
>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/matthewadams
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> aspectj-users mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> aspectj-users mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>
>> skype:matthewadams12
>> googletalk:[email protected]
>> http://matthewadams.me
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/matthewadams
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> aspectj-users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aspectj-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
>
>


-- 
mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>
skype:matthewadams12
googletalk:[email protected]
http://matthewadams.me
http://www.linkedin.com/in/matthewadams
_______________________________________________
aspectj-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users

Reply via email to