From: Alexandru Popescu Date: 2005-10-21T16:50:09+09:00 Subject: Re: Cut-based AOP #: Ryan Leavengood changed the world a bit at a time by saying on 10/21/2005 6:35 AM :# > On 10/20/05, Alexandru Popescu wrote: >> >> Probably it would be interesting to start doing the cuts and see how we can build over it. >> Unfortunately, I still cannot see solutions for some of the points I have mentioned >> previously. > > I have tried to follow along on this *very long* and verbose thread, > but one thing I wanted to comment on here was that you must be careful > in not trying to "change the world" so to speak in one small RCR. That > almost guarantees that Matz won't accept it (I wouldn't either.) > > I think the approach that Peter and Trans are following is the best. > Have a well thought out and relatively small RCR that will have a > better chance of being accepted. When and if that happens, it can then > be determined if something is lacking and then further RCRs can be > proposed to continue the gradual evolution of the Ruby AOP system. > > Something I have learned all too well in my life is that trying to > achieve perfection and completion on the first try in any project is a > recipe for failure and disappointment. I don't think there is anything > in the nature of the cut's RCR that would preclude adding the things > you want Alex (though I certainly could be wrong, since I'm not AOP > expert), so I fail to see your concern. > > Try to think evolution, no revolution. > > Regards, > Ryan > > Thanks Ryan. I agree with you on most of the above things. Indeed my mails can look like revolution instead of evolution, as you are saying. I was afraid that this will be the immediate feeling about them. In fact, their real intentions is to show the steps of evolution an aop may pass in a short and long run. Comming from a few years of study and work in the aop field, made me ask if the current RCR is/will be able to cope with some of the things defined by aop theory (and supproted in some other solutions). In Java this is happening for a couple of years. The most important aop frameworks (or solutions or implementations, doesn't really matter the name) have passed through all these small steps: - AspectWerkz have been redesigned 3 times - AspectJ has changed it's internals for a couple of times too - we are seeing movements of adding support for AOP at the virtual machine level (BEA already did it, Sun has started providing something in this direction too). I really hope that my messages will be interpretted the way they were intended and not as a counter-argue against the RCR. thanks for your time, ./alex -- .w( the_mindstorm )p.