Some Sneaky AOP Talk
  Posted November 01, 2002    PermaLink    Comments (0)  

John Lam was remarking about how OOP and such are mostly used for abstractions now rather than for re-use when he said:

But is it enough? As most of you reading this have experienced, there are limits to what you can do with Patterns, OOP, and structured programming. You find that there are features that cut across your well-designed class hierarchies and object graphs. These are the warts in your program that spring to life innocently enough, but then spread as your program becomes increasingly more complex. It is these warts that make it hard for you to comprehend your software. It is these warts that make it hard for you to extend your software's functionality. [ IUnknown.com ]
That is almost exactly the typical rational for AOP. And he didin't use the words "Aspect" or "AOP" once. If anyone needs a non-hostile justificaiton of AOP to give to someone (say, a boss) this would be a good article to send.
Trackback URL
  TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://shemnon.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/42
 
Post Comment
 

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?


Name:
Email Address:
URL: