No need to be so disparaging! It's not just about logging, AOP is used for database transactions as well...
On 20 December 2011 20:48, Ricky Clarkson <[email protected]> wrote: > I thought that in 99% of cases it was used to show how useful AOP is, > and thereafter limited to logging so that the program remains readable > (i.e., the code does what the code says). > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 5:46 PM, Kevin Wright <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I guess the biggest issue with AOP is that in 99% of cases it's used to > > shoehorn FP concepts into a mostly-object-oriented-but-not-functional[1] > > language. > > > > You take an object, you pick on some of the methods therein and wrap them > > with around advice, before advice, after advice, etc. In FP these > methods > > can be treated as first-class concepts in their own right. You take a > > function, pass it to a function, return a function; there's no need to > build > > these specialist constructs just to access methods that can only ever > exist > > within the context of an object. > > > > After all... In the kingdom of nouns, the only thing you can ever do > with a > > verb is execute it. Put verbs on an equal footing with nouns and you can > > deal with them directly, no tricky marshalling required. > > > > > > [1] Yes, mostly, primitives and static members are most emphatically > *NOT* > > object-oriented. > > > > > > > > > > > > On 20 December 2011 20:22, Alex Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> I could ask what's wrong with AOP, but you're probably thinking about > >> the same as me on that one. I like to call code like that "god" > >> code. It's the hidden mysterious force that can really screw things > >> up without almost anyone knowing where it came from and why, or being > >> able to fathom it's intention. Sometimes though - a little divine > >> intervention is handy :D > >> > >> On Dec 20, 12:05 am, Casper Bang <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > On Saturday, December 17, 2011 3:41:42 AM UTC+1, Alex Turner wrote: > >> > > >> > > I wrote AOP code last year, and was told off because no one else > could > >> > > understand AOP yet (srsly?), and so it couldn't be maintained > >> > > >> > Ah, now I understand better. You had me interested until you mentioned > >> > AOP. > >> > :) > >> > >> -- > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups > >> "The Java Posse" group. > >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > >> [email protected]. > >> For more options, visit this group at > >> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Kevin Wright > > mail: [email protected] > > gtalk / msn : [email protected] > > quora: http://www.quora.com/Kevin-Wright > > google+: http://gplus.to/thecoda > > twitter: @thecoda > > vibe / skype: kev.lee.wright > > steam: kev_lee_wright > > > > "My point today is that, if we wish to count lines of code, we should not > > regard them as "lines produced" but as "lines spent": the current > > conventional wisdom is so foolish as to book that count on the wrong > side of > > the ledger" ~ Dijkstra > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "The Java Posse" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected]. > > For more options, visit this group at > > http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "The Java Posse" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > > -- Kevin Wright mail: [email protected] gtalk / msn : [email protected] quora: http://www.quora.com/Kevin-Wright google+: http://gplus.to/thecoda <[email protected]> twitter: @thecoda vibe / skype: kev.lee.wright steam: kev_lee_wright "My point today is that, if we wish to count lines of code, we should not regard them as "lines produced" but as "lines spent": the current conventional wisdom is so foolish as to book that count on the wrong side of the ledger" ~ Dijkstra -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
