AOP and pep 246

Paddy paddy3118 at googlemail.com
Fri Nov 2 08:15:51 CET 2007


On Nov 1, 4:46 pm, Kay Schluehr <kay.schlu... at gmx.net> wrote:
> On 1 Nov., 16:18, "Rustom Mody" <rustompm... at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I am interested in AOP in python.  From here one naturally (or
> > google-ly) reaches peak.
> > But peak seems to be discontinued.
> > Whereas pep-246 on adaptors seems to be rejected in favor of something else.
>
> > What??
>
> > Can someone please throw some light on whats the current state of the art?
>
> AOP was a research that gone nowhere - at least not in its orginal
> AspectJ form:

If you Verify integrated circuits then you might know of the Specman e
language (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specman), That pre-dates
AspectJ and is very much
alive. Its AOP feature-set is different to that of AspectJ.
Our Verification engineers find the AOP paradigm to be very
productive. It
allows them to write a testbench in e and use AOP to extend it to
create
different testcases.

Just found a version of the LRM online (search for 'extend'):
http://www.ieee1647.org/downloads/prelim_e_lrm.pdf

- Paddy.




More information about the Python-list mailing list