From: Simen Edvardsen Date: 2006-06-14T22:22:52+09:00 Subject: Re: Cut-based AOP On 6/14/06, transfire@gmail.com wrote: > > Austin Ziegler wrote: > > On 6/13/06, Ruby Newbie wrote: > > > Curious about AOP in Ruby, I've downloaded the Cut patch for 1.8.3, > > > installed gperf, and am trying to understand a few things. But - the Cut > > > RCR thread appears to have died. From comments about the RCR, the voting > > > appears to be positive - something like 10 votes for and 2 against. Not > > > being familiar with the RCR process - is Cut going to see the light of day? > > > Has another AOP RCR or library been proposed which has captured mind share > > > bringing a premature end to Cut? Are the majority of Ruby developers > > > seeking to use AOP satisfied with aspectr? > > > > I have yet to need AOP in Ruby. Of any sort. > > Well, saying that is sort-of like programming Turbo Pascal in the 80's > and saying "I have yet to need OOP". Well, you could just go Functional Programming All the Way (tm). Not my preference, but still. > AOP is not just a little side > utility, it's a whole new angle on coding. Have a look at this: > > http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2003-November/193337.html > I don't think this sheds much light on AOP as applied to Ruby. At least I got confused by the Java-like syntax (with such a verbose language no doubt you'd want something like this) and the fact that all the samples seem longer and more cumbersome than the "standard" way of doing this, while not adding much value. I imagine much of this could be done with some metaprogramming. I'm happy with the pre and post hooks planned for 2.0. > T. > > > -- - Simen