[aosd-discuss] Fw: invasives aspects

[Ashley at Metamaxim]

Gregor

> The various arguments that AOP does not support modular reasoning invariably rest on the notion that we ought to be 
> able to do modular reasoning without even simple machine support -- to be able to print code out and reason about it 
> effectively from the printouts. Since no practicing developer tries to reason about code today without tool support, even 
> for OO programming, it seems an unrealistic constraint to place on AOP.

The paper I cited does not suggest that reasoning must/should be possible without tool support. I can see that using a tool might make reasoning easier, but it is difficult to imagine that it can affect whether reasoning is theoretically possible.

> IMHO all of these arguments against 'invasive' advice miss the key point: without AOP modularity constructs, true 
> crosscutting concerns cannot be reasoned about in a modular way. With AOP constructs they can.

I did not understand this comment. Can you elucidate, please?

Rgds
Ashley
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://aosd.net/pipermail/discuss_aosd.net/attachments/20070109/bdfcae0f/attachment.html