Aspect oriented Everything?

Michael Pyle mpyle at legato.com
Wed Aug 27 16:22:32 CEST 2003


I hear what your saying but have to admit it's not sinking in very well. Can
you provide a simple concrete example contrasting an OOP approach to an AOP
with code snipets?

--Mike Pyle 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: hungjunglu at yahoo.com [mailto:hungjunglu at yahoo.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 7:58 PM
> To: python-list at python.org
> Subject: Re: Aspect oriented Everything?
> 
> Some people don't like AOP because it violates encapsulation 
> in the vertical dimension. But this way of thinking is kind 
> of, erh, unidimensional. Because conversely, a program that 
> is built from purely AOP is encapsulated in its own aspect 
> dimension, and the usage of OOP in that case would violate 
> the encapsulation in the horizontal dimension. The fact is, 
> both factorizations are needed in the real world. 
> Aspect-oriented coding and object-oriented coding are like 
> the conjugate variables in quantum mechanics, whether you use 
> one picture or the other, at the end of the day they are 
> equivalent, but in some circumstances it's better to use one 
> than the other. (If you know Fourier transform, you know what 
> I mean. A localized wave packet in time necessarily means a 
> spread-out packet in frequency, and vice-versa. You can't 
> have encapsulation both ways.)
> 
> regards,
> 
> Hung Jung
> -- 
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/attachments/20030827/d41ba6f3/attachment.html>


More information about the Python-list mailing list