[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [aspectj-users] JavaBlackBelt exam on AspectJ
- From: Simone Gianni <simoneg@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 18:05:36 +0200
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- User-agent: Thunderbird 22.214.171.124 (X11/20070310)
Ok, posted the basic exam on the JBB forum, asked for template creation.
As soon as they create it, we can start filling it with questions and
rounding the corners of details. Anybody else wants to share with me the
If the basic exam creation goes well, then we will ask also for an
advanced one, one step after the other.
Regarding your notes, I do agree on all of them, except two :)
Yes, we can remove from the basic exam the part about privileged aspects
and abstract aspects, but I think it's important that one of the
objectives of the exam is to use aspect libraries, so intantiate
concrete aspects that extends abstract ones. So, we can remove
privileged and abstract aspects meaning "you don't need to write them",
but I think we should keep is as "Know that there are aspects which are
already written and you can extend".
Regarding the @Annotation style programming, while I do understand its
importance (no need for a compiler but only a weaver), I think it should
be limited to the knowledge of its existence, and not a complete grammar
knowledge. If we find it fun and useful to have AspectJ exams on Java
Black Belt, we could then add another exam dedicated to this syntax as
an intermediate optional module. The reason I see it whis way is not
because I don't like @Annotation programming style (thought I don't
personally use it), but simply because adding also that to the basic
exam would put the bar a bit too high, since it's an entirely new world
to explore, and I see that many people writing here on the mailing list
uses the "traditional" syntax. Anyway I'm completely open to change
everything if people here think my POV is wrong!
Andrew Eisenberg wrote:
> This looks quite good and very nearly complete as far as I can tell.
> There can be endless of tinkering and endless details to add to each
> section, but what you have is very good.
> Some comments below.
[ save-the-planet/cut-long-threads policy ]
CEO Semeru s.r.l.