Re: [Meinds-developers] Aspect oriented framework, first go

[Dmitri C. <di...@bi...>]

On Wed, 28 Nov 2001, Rickard [ISO-8859-1] =D6berg wrote:

> I have now finished the first working version of an Aspect Oriented=20
> Programming (AOP) framework. It is very simple, yet extremely powerful.=
=20
> I should be very useful as the base for the object model of Meinds.

hehe... yes I agree... you are very useful for the object model for Meinds
(o:  if only someone had thought to not make you a singleton!

> Individuals have the ACL, Member, and User aspects attached to them. The=
=20
> basic object itself that these are attached to is a simple string (the=20
> id). Hence, the object itself does not provide much functionality,=20
> except toString(), hashCode(), and equals() implementations (from=20
> java.lang.String).

I've had a good look through, and am pretty comfortable (I think) with the
flow of events and stuff (IntelliJ + Ctrl-B works wonders :), and surprise
surprise have a couple more questions related to state. =20

I _think_ I now see why state hasn't really been an issue... each aspect
can simply control their own state - yeah?  as the implementation of ACL
does... so as far as persistence is concerned, that is where that would
occur as well...  in UserImpl you have getName() simply returning the
resource id - in reality UserBuilder will load an object from persistent
store, and that is where the name would come from, yes?

one other little thing here, the term Builder, as I understand GoF use it,
is a stateful throwaway object that you use to incrementially build
something... aren't the Builders more like Factories?  or am I missing
something?

what is next on the list then?  I'd be very keen in doing something here,
and feel like I understand what you're doing in the code... I suppose a
good start would be doco - do you have any thoughts on what structure the
documentation should take (in terms of a toc)... I figure if I started
there I would (a) ensure that I'm not completely missing something - or at
least have it corrected by you, and (b) get the necessary evil of doco
started at an early point...  thoughts?

cheers
dim