[aosd-discuss] Hyper/J vs Apect-J

[Albertina Lourenci]

Peri Tarr wrote:
Hi Peri:

Would you please give me some concrete and easy example? Because this is
exactly what I am interested! Sorry for joining the discussion so late, but I was busy
with other urgent stuff!
Have a fun-filled, peaceful, creative weekend
Albertina

>
>
>
>
> A correction:  you are NOT limited to combining two pieces of software with
> Hyper/J--you can combine any number, and different ones can "interact" in
> different ways.  I'm not familiar with the MIR, so I can't speak to how the
> protocol might work with Hyper/J, but it sounds interesting--can you
> provide a reference?  (Apologies if I've missed one previously--I've only
> just returned from several days away and my inbox is a swamp that can't be
> sorted by threads...sigh...)
>
>      Peri
>
>
>                       "Tzilla Elrad"
>                       <elrad at iit.edu>          To:       "M. Awais Rashid" <marash at comp.lancs.ac.uk>, memmert at jpmdesign.de
>                       Sent by:                 cc:       discuss at aosd.net
>                       discuss-admin at aos        Subject:  Re: [aosd-discuss] Hyper/J vs Apect-J
>                       d.net
>
>
>                       09/10/2002 11:11
>                       AM
>                       Please respond to
>                       elrad
>
>
>
> -- Original Message --
>
> >Also, I do not agree that in the AspectJ model aspects are not supposed
> >to
> >talk to each other. In most applications (in my experience) they have to,
> >directly or
> >indirectly (by influencing the same joinpoint). However, the latter leaves
> >much to be desired of the interaction resolution model in
> >AspectJ. Dominates and simple advice ordering does not really cut it when
> >you have a few largish aspects in your application.
> >
> >Awais.
>
> I would like to refer to one point only, so for the sake of simplcity I
> deleted the rest of the corospondences.
>
> MIR:  Multi-Interacion-Resolution
>
> The issue is when, how, by whom and on what visability rules interaction
> resolutions could be made. It is true that in AspectJ we have the "base"
> and "aspects" that are reated differently where as in Hyper/J any two
> pieces
> os software can be combind with each other.
> Both hyper/j (?) and AspectJ are limited to interaction of TWO pieces of
> software at a time. This makes interaction resolution based on a group of
> software pieces complicated.  many times there is no simple serialization
> sequence of pairs-interactions that can simulate this
> Multi-Interacion-Resolution
>
> How would you simulate a general MIR- Multi-Interacion-Resolution in
> AspectJ?
> Hyper/j?
>
> -Tzilla
>
> Dr. Tzilla Elrad
> Research Professor
> Department of Computer Science
> Illinois Institute of Technology
> (312) 567-5142
> http://www.iit.edu/~elrad
>
> _________________________________________________
> AOSD discuss mailing list    -   discuss at aosd.net
> To be removed send mail to discuss-admin at aosd.net
> or visit http://aosd.net
>
> _________________________________________________
> AOSD discuss mailing list    -   discuss at aosd.net
> To be removed send mail to discuss-admin at aosd.net
> or visit http://aosd.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: lourenci.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 316 bytes
Desc: Card for Albertina Lourenci
Url : http://server2.hostvalu.com/pipermail/discuss_aosd.net/attachments/20020914/10370e8e/lourenci.vcf