Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
RE: [aspectj-users] AspectJ and JBoss AOP implementation

I guess Gregor's question is not about the technological merits of both
approaches but rather a comparison between the ease of learning and use of
these two approaches. My impression is that JBOSS AOP is much like a kind
of meta-object protocol which can be traced back to Gregor's earlier work.
AspectJ is certainly a more intimate language approach. Can someone tell a
real learning experience comparison? I myself haven't used JBOSS AOP too
much and am curious about it.  

Charles Zhang 		(http://www.eecg.utoronto.ca/~czhang)
Computer Group, Dept. of Elec. & Comp. Engineering 
U. of Toronto, Ontario, Canada
*********************************************************
" Yawn!!" (Charles Zhang) 

On Thu, 22 Jan 2004, Nikhil Kumar wrote:

> The key issues that I have seen with the JBOSS AOP
> solution from a commercial adoption perspective.  
> 
> The first issue is the association with the server. 
> For example my corporate standard server may be BEA
> WLS or IBM WAS then JBOSS AOP adoption is going to
> have a lot of roadblocks.  At previous clients, this
> would be a very clear reason for pushback from most
> corporate IT governance (architecture standards)
> groups.
> 
> The second issue is that AspectJ "weaves" the code in
> - i.e. it is a compile-time solution, whereas JBOSS
> AOP is a run-time solution. I know at my current
> client there was a refusal to use JBOSS AOP over this
> issue.  Key arguments given against the use of JBOSS
> AOP were reliability, potential class-loader issues,
> and potential performance risks with a run-time
> implementation.
> 
> Thirdly there is the issue of industry acceptance and
> standards.  Currently there seems to be an acceptance
> of AspectJ as the direction in which AOP programming
> will go and with a great likelihood of it becoming the
> industry standard.  There will always be other AOP
> implementations, but, similar to C++/ Smalltalk
> adoption, it is more likely that AspectJ will become
> the initial leader and that the other solutions will
> become the Smalltalks of the AOP world.
> 
> Fourthly there is the issue of portability (tied to
> the 3rd issue) and vendor (read platform) lock-in. 
> AspectJ is tied to Java (a standard that is
> extensively used) and is not tied to a particular
> platform/ app. server.
> 
> I would recommend that the key "features" that seem to
> be compelling in terms of JBOSS AOP, namely
> declarative configuration may be adopted by AspectJ,
> but again only incorporated into the compile time. 
> What I mean is that AspectJ programs be able to
> support the declarative semantics and then weave that
> into components that are used to deply to existing
> technologies that are used for hot-deployment.  For
> e.g. have the ability to declaratively configure
> AspectJ so that you can then compile and deploy a
> framework with that capability, wrap it in a component
> model (make it an EJB for example) and then deploy
> using the current component model standards
> hot-deployment support.
> 
> Finally here is one more comment:
> There does not seem to be the requisite support from
> industry and standards organizations.  One of the
> things that spurred adoption of XML was the compelling
> industry support.  I do not see anything like the
> ISO/IEEE/ACM or commercial groups pursuing this. Nor
> is there something similar to the JCP. Practically
> there will need to be industry support to propel this
> into the mainstream.  
> 
> Regards,
> Nikhil
> --- Gregor Kiczales <gregor@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > Arun Natarajan said:
> > 
> > > Has someone recently evaluated AspectJ and the
> > JBoss 
> > > implementation? I read some old papers talking
> > about
> > > the performance related issues with JBoss, but any
> > > other differences? JBoss seems to be more easy to
> > learn 
> > > than AspectJ.
> > 
> > I've seen this said a number of times, that JBoss
> > (and AspectWerkz)
> > are easier to learn than AspectJ. And it shows up in
> > various press
> > articles, where people just repeat what others have
> > said to them.
> > 
> > But I know many people disagree -- that is, many
> > people think AspectJ
> > is easier to learn. So I'd like to ask (and perhaps
> > start a discussion).
> > 
> > Why do you say that JBoss seems easier to learn than
> > AspectJ?
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > aspectj-users mailing list
> > aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
> 
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
> http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/
> _______________________________________________
> aspectj-users mailing list
> aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
> 



Back to the top