Re: Just for the record
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 10:43:20 GMT
Message-ID: <c3tog.3215$pu3.78906_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
>
> Well, I've been trying to figure out what specifically you're referring
> to, and I'm not having much luck. The author(s) you mention seem
> to be associated with Aspect Oriented Programming, which, although
> I have no particular reason to think it worth my attention, nonetheless
> has not (as far as I know) *redefined* any terms, but rather seems
> to have made up their own terms. But perhaps terms such as
> "aspects" and "cross cutting" had an earlier meaning I was not
> aware of? Or perhaps I'm just missing your direction entirely.
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 10:43:20 GMT
Message-ID: <c3tog.3215$pu3.78906_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
Marshall wrote:
>>Gregor Kiczales is a dangerous embecile who took a bad computational >>model and made it much, much worse. Thanks to his blithe and ignorant >>redefinition of very clear and extremely informative terms, the chances >>Dijkstra's posterity will achieve the badly needed maturity for our >>profession that Dijkstra, himself, long pursued are greatly reduced.
>
> Well, I've been trying to figure out what specifically you're referring
> to, and I'm not having much luck. The author(s) you mention seem
> to be associated with Aspect Oriented Programming, which, although
> I have no particular reason to think it worth my attention, nonetheless
> has not (as far as I know) *redefined* any terms, but rather seems
> to have made up their own terms. But perhaps terms such as
> "aspects" and "cross cutting" had an earlier meaning I was not
> aware of? Or perhaps I'm just missing your direction entirely.
I am particularly disgusted by their perversion of Dijkstra's intellectual discipline of separating of concerns. Received on Wed Jun 28 2006 - 12:43:20 CEST