Re: RE: [aspectj-users] Drawbacks of AOP

["lists" <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I would disagree.  I think OOP and AOP both have their place.  Not only that, but AOP is inherently dependent upon some sort of structure to join to!



   -------Original Message-------
   > From: Ismaeil, Sameh Z <sameh.ismaeil@xxxxxxx>
   > Subject: RE: [aspectj-users] Drawbacks of AOP
   > Sent: 15 Apr 2003 10:18:22
   >
   >
   >
   >  I think these problems exist because we are in (still the beginning of) a
   >  hybrid-languages phase. AOP tools are used over OOP languages. The next big
   >  language might be more pure AOP, e.g. it might not even have class
   >  inheritance; where aspects apply on single-level classes. At this time there
   >  sure will be some way to structure aspects so as to facilitate the work of
   >  IDE's (as in OOP IDE's now). In all cases the next-phase pure-AOP languages
   >  will be more and more dependant on the tool while having less and less
   >  influence of the language syntax.
   >
   >  >
   >  > Hi everybody!
   >  >
   >  > I think there is a difference in OO and AOP. In OO, you have a
   >  > structured way to find out which method is actually called by simply
   >  > making your way up the inheritance hierarchy.
   >  >
   >  > In AOP you can not do that, at least not as it is implemented in
   >  > AspectJ. Without tool support you might not even be aware of
   >  > an aspect
   >  > influencing (or even replacing) a method you are calling.
   >  >
   >  > Any aspect can globally influence any method of the system.
   >  > There is no
   >  > structured way to find out what functionality is actually executed by
   >  > reading the source of a class anymore.
   >  >
   >  > So I think the problem about "awareness" is quite important -
   >  > that's why
   >  > there is so much effort to create tools to reveal this influence.
   >  >
   >  > Best Regards,
   >  >     Max
   >  >
   >  > Robert Wenner wrote:
   >  >
   >  > >I wonder how much this "aware of the aspect" problem counts in some
   >  > >years...
   >  > >
   >  > >After all, we already got used to overwriting methods.
   >  > >Or does anybody reject OO because it isn't  as obvious as in
   >  > >traditional C programming which method will in fact be called?
   >  > >
   >  > >Robert
   >  > >_______________________________________________
   >  > >aspectj-users mailing list
   >  > >aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
   >  > >http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
   >  > >  
   >  > >
   >  >
   >  > --
   >  > Maximilian Stoerzer
   >  > Lehrstuhl Software Systeme - FMI - University of Passau
   >  > Tel: +49 851 509 3096, eMail: stoerzer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
   >  >
   >  >
   >  > _______________________________________________
   >  > aspectj-users mailing list
   >  > aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
   >  > http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
   >  >
   >  _______________________________________________
   >  aspectj-users mailing list
   >  aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
   >  http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
   -------Original Message-------