Advertisement

Escaping with Future Variables in HALO

  • Charlotte Herzeel
  • Kris Gybels
  • Pascal Costanza
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4839)

Abstract

HALO is a novel aspect language introducing a logic-based pointcut language which combines history-based pointcuts and “escape” conditions for interacting with the base language. This combination is difficult to support when escape conditions access context exposed by “future” join points. This paper introduces a weaving mechanism based on copying objects for resolving such pointcuts. Though this seems a memory consuming solution, it can be easily combined with HALO’s analysis for reducing the join point history. Furthermore, pointcuts with escape conditions accessing future join point context, sometimes require less memory than pointcuts that don’t, but otherwise implement the same functionality. In this paper, we illustrate this by measuring memory usage for simulations of an e-commerce application, switching between an implementation where the pointcut definitions contain escape conditions referring to future join point context, and an equivalent implementation that doesn’t.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bobrow, D., DeMichiel, L., Gabriel, R., Keene, S., Kiczales, G., Moon, D.: Common lisp object system specification. Lisp and Symbolic Computation 1(3-4), 245–394 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gybels, K., Brichau, J.: Arranging language features for more robust pattern-based crosscuts. In: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Aspect-Oriented Software Development (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Herzeel, C., Gybels, K., Costanza, P.: Modularizing crosscuts in an e-commerce application in lisp using halo. In: proceedings of the International Lisp Conference (ILC) (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Forgy, C.L.: Rete: A fast algorithm for the many pattern/many object pattern match problem. Artificial Intelligence 19(1), 17–37 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Masuhara, H., Kiczales, G., Dutchyn, C.: A compilation and optimization model for aspect-oriented programs. In: Hedin, G. (ed.) CC 2003 and ETAPS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2622, Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ostermann, K., Mezini, M., Bockisch, C.: Expressive pointcuts for increased modularity. In: European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bodden, E., Hendren, L., Lhoták, O.: A staged static program analysis to improve the performance of runtime monitoring. Technical report, ABC Group (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Charlotte Herzeel
    • 1
  • Kris Gybels
    • 1
  • Pascal Costanza
    • 1
  1. 1.Vrije Universiteit Brussel 

Personalised recommendations