Subject: Re: clarification on HW3, problem 3
From: Karl Lieberherr (lieber@ccs.neu.edu)
Date: Thu Oct 17 2002 - 13:06:57 EDT
You are right: in the end we just want the violations.
But during development it is handy to know WHY a join point
is ok. Therefore I said:
we want to write a program that flags all calls
where the target object is either an immediate part or an argument.
I think that an optimal solution would use a Debugging aspect.
With the Debugging aspect added we get the reasons why a join point
is ok.
Without the Debugging aspect we only get the violations: in this case
if it is neither an immediate part nor an argument.
-- Karl
>From cobbe@ccs.neu.edu Thu Oct 17 12:44:54 2002
>From: "Richard C. Cobbe" <cobbe@ccs.neu.edu>
>
>Dr. Lieberherr:
>
>I need a slight clarification on problem 3 of this week's homework
>assignment (the composition of the two aspects).
>
>I'm assuming that we should print out a warning indicating a violation
>if the method call is neither to an immediate part of this nor to an
>argument of the calling method. If the method call is acceptable under
>either of these two criteria, we should not print a warning. Is that
>correct? (In short: only print a warning if it fails both tests.)
>
>Unfortunately, the most straightforward implementation of the
>composition doesn't do this -- it prints a warning if the method call
>fails *either* test, instead of printing one if it fails *both* tests.
>
>Or am I just missing something?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Richard
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Oct 17 2002 - 13:06:59 EDT