Re: [Webwork-user] Why I like WebWork

[Matt B. <ma...@sm...>]

see below.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rickard" <ri...@dr...>
To: "Matt Baldree" <ma...@sm...>
Cc: "Christoph Kiehl" <ki...@su...>;
<web...@li...>
Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 12:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Webwork-user] Why I like WebWork


> Matt Baldree wrote:
> > What are you using instead of Aspect and why did you decide not to use
it?
>
> What I'm using is already answered in other posts, but why I didn't use
> it is for the following reasons:
> 1) the need for a proprietary compiler

agree. I find this a pain but you can run the code through their compiler to
produce generated code and run it through the normal compiler.

> 2) the somewhat unwieldy language extensions in AspectJ

agree. What do you expect from the creator of CLOS. To get a better feel of
the language, I find it helpful to use their IDE plugins to see the effects
of your advice. They only have plugins for Eclipse, JBuilder, Emacs, and
Forte. When IntelliJ matures/releases its API, they will create a plugin for
it.

> 3) the inability to do runtime changes (everything in AspectJ is
> compiletime)

This will be changed with 2.0 release. They have chosen to not provide
runtime changes because they wanted to exercise the language first.

> 4) I needed the system as a whole to be proxy-based in order to do
> memorymanagement with object caches. Since AspectJ works on regular
> classes that wouldn't work (AFAIK).

You can advise objects as well.

> 5) I wanted to find out if it was possible to implement AOP using plain
> Java.
>

Ok, I'm sure it makes sense for your project. But, I think that AspectJ will
become the defacto standard in the future.

> That's about it I guess.
>
> /Rickard
>
> --
> Rickard Öberg
>
>
>