Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
RE: [aspectj-users] CNET News.com Article on AOP

Hi William,

I believe AOP code is higher quality, because it is better modularized. You just can't rely on consistently implementing a policy for crosscutting concerns in scattered and tangled code. Errors always creep in. So if you care about implementing fine-grained security, error handling, performing statistics, or tracing effectively, AOP results in better quality through consistent application and update.

I agree completely that AOP, like any powerful technology, can be misapplied. Just as OO was (and is). And that skillful engineers will improve the quality in any implementation.

I've found it's sometimes necessary to refactor code to expose join points to AOP (better OO designs require little or no refactoring). And it's better to design with AOP in mind, though good OO designs are generally quite amenable to adding aspects (or refactoring to use aspects).

I don't want to see AOP being overhyped either, but I don't see that happening (at least not yet). If anything, the PR it's getting is addressing a subset of what it can do (e.g., JBoss promoting it as a way of getting C# capabilities for Java).

Thanks,
Ron

Ron Bodkin
Chief Technology Officer
New Aspects of Security
m: (415) 509-2895

> ------------Original Message-------------
> From: "Louth, William" <william.louth@xxxxxx>
> To: <aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thu, Sep-25-2003 8:05 AM
> Subject: RE: [aspectj-users] CNET News.com Article on AOP
> 
> Ron,
> 
> I did not really like the reference to your view that AOP (AspectJ) code
> tends to be better. This could be attributed to the fact that early
> adopters tend to be skillful engineers who recognize a new tool and its
> application to their problems, ;-).
> 
> I am sure that as soon AOP becomes mainstream you will see poor designs
> and code as people apply the technology wrongly - which is what happened
> to EJB.
> 
> I believe that AOP has a promising future for complex development
> projects in the hands of experienced engineers but as I have stated
> previously the more I apply AOP the more I am drawn into refactoring
> existing designs and code. AOP will not solve a poor design and it
> proves quite hard to introduce it into systems which have not been
> designed with this in mind. There still exists problems with scaling AOP
> to large projects. I really hope that JBoss's framework does not become
> widely used until we solved how to handle the direct/indirect
> interactions between different aspects on common object/component
> models.
> 
> Its great to see AOP having greater media coverage but I hope we don't
> promise too much.
> 
> All the best,
> 
> William Louth
> William.louth@xxxxxx
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ron Bodkin [mailto:rbodkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 4:28 PM
> To: aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [aspectj-users] CNET News.com Article on AOP
> 
> 
> Indeed, the JBoss crew view aspect-oriented programming as a means of
> implementing attribute-oriented programming, and that perspective is
> clear in the article. And therefore it's also the emphasis of their
> message, namely fighting C#. This is probably an attempt to pull
> together with the rest of the Java world, by focusing on a common enemy
> in Microsoft.
> 
> However, the article does discuss defining rules and enforcing policies
> for the entire system, which isn't something that attribute-oriented can
> do (at least not completely). Given the audience is non-programmers, I
> think the description is reasonable.
> 
> Overall, having AOP hit the radar screen like this is helpful, even
> though I'd like to see the title be "Growth in AOP for Enterprise Java."
> Feel free to encourage Marc Fleury to change his message ...
> 
> Ron
> 
> Ron Bodkin
> Chief Technology Officer
> New Aspects of Security
> m: (415) 509-2895
> 
> > ------------Original Message-------------
> > From: Carlos E Perez <ceperez@xxxxxxxxx>
> > To: aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > Date: Thu, Sep-25-2003 3:30 AM
> > Subject: Re: [aspectj-users] CNET News.com Article on AOP
> > 
> > It's good PR, however, the main theme of the article,
> > that is "a way to fight the rising popularity of C#" completely 
> > distracts the audience from the real issue.
> > 
> > The other problem is the association of Aspect
> > programming with Attribute based programming.  If you replaced 
> > "Aspect-oriented" with "Attribute-based" this article would have made 
> > more sense.
> > 
> > Carlos
> > 
> > 
> > --- Ron Bodkin <rbodkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > This article was published today as the lead story
> > > on CNET News.com: http://news.com.com/2100-1007_3-5081831.html.  
> > > It's good to see the increase in interest and awareness
> > > of AOP from industry news sources (as well as
> > > industry analysts).
> > > 
> > > Ron
> > > 
> > > Ron Bodkin
> > > Chief Technology Officer
> > > New Aspects of Security
> > > m: (415) 509-2895 _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> > 
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> 
> 


Back to the top