RE: [Springframework-developer] AOP API

[renaud <re...@ao...>]

>=20
> I'm inclined to agree with Bob's suggestion that we should=20
> drop the AttributeRegistry from our pointcut signatures. This=20
> probably means it should go from the AOP Alliance package as=20
> well - Renaud, what's your view on this--not from a Spring=20
> perspective but from an AOP Alliance perspective.

I am more than ever conviced that metadata is a key point of AOP. In
particular, metadata will be extremely useful when configuring the =
aspects.

Moreover, from a recent discussion with Gregor Kiczales, AspectJ will
support metadata based pointcuts as soon as JSR-175 is done.

So I think that a fa=E7ade have to exist in the AOP Alliance interfaces.

> One problem with moving away with an AttributeRegistry=20
> concept on MethodInvocation is that we don't want Pointcuts=20
> to be dependent on Singleton magic (ie black magic) to get=20
> metadata: this should be easily pluggable at runtime. Perhaps=20
> a pointcuts interested in metadata could implement a=20
> MetadataAware interface and expose an Attributes property.

However, I've never really understood the metadata attached to the
invocation. For me, metadata are set on the Java meta elements (classes,
fields, methods, ...). They do not depend on the invocation then.

I you want to have metadata defined for an invocation, it is ok for me, =
but
it has nothing to do with the JSR-175.=20

Renaud.

>=20
>=20
> Views on this?
>=20
> Regards,
> Riod
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003,
> 16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest=20
> developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL, WebDAV,=20
> and more! http://www.apachecon.com/=20
> _______________________________________________
> Springframework-developer mailing list=20
> Spr...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer
>=20