[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "Humane Pointcut Languages" [Was: Re: [aspectj-users] AW:Pointcuton a constructor with a custom @Annotation]
- From: "Jonas BonÃr" <jonas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 19:32:36 -0700
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=hnM8U6fjMg8IHqT9KHRZ+8MbnnWjZSifpkfmkxfO+gKWg/eqXiGM+vfAdONlF5lRHAitEtP6qIuUONK0V5cSIZ0i/tj+btdyWQUXIvG0PQz1p7Nf2NyXk6a7G0vSelRbGz59IN1oAabQK9le2hsa6dpnB3q6RO6eA8ru3kNxctE=
I think Dean captures an important problem when he writes: "it bothers
me that we discuss high-level concerns, say for example security, then
turn around and write PCDs using very low-level primitives that tend
to reference specific classes, methods, etc."
But I can't see why a more verbose, java like syntax would be more
"humane", and it for sure does not address the above stated problem.
I strongly believe that the only thing that helps is to raise the
abstraction level above implementation details and rely on metadata.
(A plus would of course be to have an optional simplified syntax that
supports that directly, but with a goal to be more concise not
See my post http://jonasboner.com/2006/04/24/domain-driven-pointcut-design/,
where I actually discussing another issue, but that is closely related
to what I think is the main problem with having the wrong abstraction
On 4/27/06, Dean Wampler <dean@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Nick Lesiecki wrote:
> > I have to admit that Dean's proposal looks appealing. Pre-aspectj 5, I
> > could easily parse 90% of PCDs. With the addition of annotations, it's
> > become much more difficult to ascertain what patterns and modifiers
> > apply to what part of the pointcut. For some PCDs, it's simple, for
> > other's it's become much much harder. Note that one of the number-one
> > complaints about AspectJ I hear from new users is the density of the
> > poincut language.
> > Nick
> Thanks for your support ;) By the way, I wrote up a summary of my ideas
> on my blog: http://blog.aspectprogramming.com/
> Dean Wampler, Ph.D.
> dean at aspectprogramming.com
> I want my tombstone to say:
> Unknown Application Error in Dean Wampler.exe.
> Application Terminated.
> [Okay] [Cancel]
> aspectj-users mailing list