| 1. | For example , whereas in the code style you would write this
例如，在代码风格中，可以这样编写： |
| 2. | Code style vs . annotations and xml
代码风格与注释和xml的比较 |
| 3. | Consider the code idiom in listing 3 for retrieving the referent object from a
检索被引用对象的代码风格： |
| 4. | So , should you go with the code style , or declare aspects using annotations or xml
那么，应当采用代码风格，还是用注释或xml声明方面呢？ |
| 5. | Style can be used in conjunction with aspects developed using the code style , and vice - versa
风格开发的方面可以与用代码风格开发的方面结合使用，反之亦然） 。 |
| 6. | The code style doesn t require explicitly binding advice to pointcuts , as found in the xml styles , or the
代码风格不需要显式地把通知绑定到切入点（就像xml风格那样） ，也不需要把通知绑定到 |
| 7. | Use the prevailing style in a file or module , or ask the owner , if you are on someone else ' s turf . module owner rules all
在文件或模块中使用普遍风格，或者。 。 。 。模块拥有者规定变量命名和代码风格。 |
| 8. | It s clear from the aspect declarations in figures 2 - 5 that the code style is the most concise approach to working with aop declarations
显然，从图2 - 5的方面声明来看，代码风格是处理aop声明最简洁的技术。 |
| 9. | If you choose the code style of aspectj , you ll find that working with a pointcut feels like working with code , rather than an unstructured string value
如果选择了aspectj的代码风格，那么就会发现处理切入点感觉就像处理代码，而不像是处理非结构化的字符串值。 |
| 10. | While aspectj offers a code style that is an extension of the java language , the other three approaches use a combination of plain java with xml and annotation - based aspect languages
虽然aspectj提供了一种代码风格，这种风格是java语言的一种扩展，但是其他三种技术都采用了普通java语言与基于xml和注释的方面语言的组合。 |
