From: Daniel Schierbeck <daniel.schierbeck@...>
Date: 2005-10-25T16:07:01+09:00
Subject: Re: Cut-based AOP

Trans wrote:
> Christian Neukirchen wrote:
> 
>>"Trans" <transfire@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>
>>>itsme213@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>Does this also provide a quite general form of dependency injection,
>>>>very different in nature and weight compared to something like Needle?
>>>
>>>Had to give this some thought. Mu immediate conjecture is that it must
>>>since DI and AOP are closely related. But I'm no DI expert like Jim
>>>Weirich. But in giving it some conosideration, I imagine there's not
>>>much more to it than:
>>>
>>>  class App
>>>
>>>    def logger
>>>      nil  # no logger available
>>>    end
>>>
>>>  end
>>>
>>>  cut AppContainer < App
>>>
>>>    def logger
>>>      Logger.new
>>>    end
>>>
>>>  end
>>
>>Which will make you want "multiple-inheritance" for cutpoints. :-)
> 
> 
> I thought about this some but I don't understand what you mean. How ill
> it make you want MI? Aren't mixins enough?
> 
> 
>>It's not that trivial, but it certainly can be used to implement DI.
> 
> 
> I realize that it's a trivialized rendition, but could you provided
> some pointers on improving?
>  
> Thanks,
> T.
> 

I can't see why there *shouldn't* be multi-inheritance for cuts, unless 
you need to be able to find the exact class that's being cut by a 
certain cut.

   cut Kut < A, B, C
     def initialize(*args, &block)
       puts "ahoy, mateys! arrr!"
       super
     end
   end


Cheers,
Daniel