[aspectc-user] template parameters -- calling VS execution pointcuts

[Mike Mortensen]

This is a little long, just because I wanted to show the file, aspect, 
and and so forth...

I'm using AspectC++ (on Linux/x86) in the context of an object-oriented 
framework that defines a
rich hierarchy of classes.  So far, that's gone well since the methods 
use pointers to classes in the
hierarchy, but I ran into a recent issue with methods and functions that 
have arguments of
template types in the std:: namespace, such as  string, map, vector, and 
so forth.


For example, here's a simplified example:

#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#include <map>
using namespace std;

void tmrGetAllCellInstantiations(int a,char b,string name, 
map<int,string>& datamap);
int tmrMain(int a, int b, double * data)
{
   cerr << "running code for body of tmrMain..." << endl;
   map<int,string> mydata;
   tmrGetAllCellInstantiations(a,'b',"cell",mydata);
   string foo = "cell2";
   tmrGetAllCellInstantiations(a,'b',foo,mydata);
   return 0;
}

void tmrGetAllCellInstantiations(int a,char b,string 
name,map<int,string>& mydata)
{
   cerr << "running code for body  of tmrGetAllCellInstantiations..." << 
endl;
   cerr << "  a=" << a  << " b=" << b << " name=" << name << endl;
   return;
}

int main()
{
  return tmrMain(1,2,NULL);
}

As you can see, I have two functions that start with "tmr":
   int tmrMain(int a, int b, double * data)
   void tmrGetAllCellInstantiations(int a,char b,string name, 
map<int,string>& datamap);
The tmrGetAllCellInstantiations has a map of strings as an parameter.

I apply my aspect file by going into a src.in directory and doing this:

    /net/hpsvmmo/home/mmo/home/AspectC++/ac-0.9.3/ac++ -v1 -r AOP.xml 
--no_line --gnu --problem_spec_scope
         --config /net/hpsvmmo/home/mmo/AspectC++/ac-0.9.3/puma.config 
-I.     
    -I/net/hpesmmo/home/mmo/AOP_Builds/StlFlow/include 
-I/net/hpesmmo/home/mmo/AOP_Builds/StlFlow/../aspects -p . -d ../src.out

My aspects file has several kinds of advice that are intended to capture 
the CALL and EXECUTION of
*all* functions starting with "tmr". I even made 2 advice bodies that 
specifically focus on tmrGetAllCellInstantiations:

#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
aspect TimeEvent {
   pointcut call_any_tmr() =
      call("% tmr%(...)");
   pointcut exec_any_tmr() =
      execution("% tmr%(...)");

   advice call_any_tmr() : after() {
      cerr << " after CALLING " << JoinPoint::signature() << endl;
   }
   advice exec_any_tmr() : after() {
      cerr << " after EXECUTING " << JoinPoint::signature() << endl;
   }
   advice call("% tmrGetAllCellInstantiations(...)") : before()
   {
      cerr <<"before CALLING " << JoinPoint::signature() << endl;
   }
   advice execution("% tmrGetAllCellInstantiations(...)") : around() {
      cerr <<"around EXECUTION of tmrGetAllCellInstantiations" << endl;
      tjp->proceed();
      cerr <<"after around EXEUCTION of tmrGetAllCellInstantiations" << 
endl;
   }
};

The result, which I can verify both by running the program and by 
looking at the AOP.xml file (which shows
joinpoints and matching advice) is that *only* the execution of the 
tmrGetAllCellInstantiations method
is ever matched.  Any advice based on 'calling' (both for tmr% and 
tmrGetAllCellInstantiations) is not
considered a match.  The slightly garbled nature of the signature in the 
AOP.xml file:
   void tmrGetAllCellInstantiations(int,char,::std::basic_string< 
char >,::std::map< int,::std::basic_string< char > > &)
in order to handle the fact that strings and maps are templates made me 
wonder if matching calls versus executions is confused by that.

I found that if I have tmrGetAllCellInstantiations not have a string or 
map be passed as parameters (instead use a char* and a void*)
then both the calling and execution ones match just fine.  I did some 
hunting and found on the aspectc.org site that with older versions
of AspectC++ this was an issue. I'm using version 0.9.3 (and 0.9.2) with 
g++-3.3 on Debian linux.
I added the flags:
   --gnu --problem_spec_scope
to my build line but it still doesn't help. 

Has anyone else seen anything like this? 
The odd thing to me is the fact that the calling pointcut does not work 
to match a
function with template parameters but that the execution does work.

I can work around it with using execution, but my experience has been 
that using constructs like this:
    !within("% tmr%(...)")
works with call pointcuts but not execution pointcuts.

Thanks,
Mike