Path: dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu!spool.maxwell.syr.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!wn12feed!worldnet.att.net!207.35.177.252!nf3.bellglobal.com!ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca!53ab2750!not-for-mail From: Bob Badour User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.databases.theory Subject: Re: Just for the record References: <1151467159.751152.47730@b68g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1151520256.645969.96340@y41g2000cwy.googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: <1151520256.645969.96340@y41g2000cwy.googlegroups.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 28 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 19:02:16 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 142.176.58.181 X-Complaints-To: abuse@aliant.net X-Trace: ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca 1151521336 142.176.58.181 (Wed, 28 Jun 2006 16:02:16 ADT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 16:02:16 ADT Organization: Business Internet Xref: dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu comp.databases.theory:42531 erk wrote: > Bob Badour wrote: > >>Marshall wrote: >> >>>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. > > Agreed, and having worked in Lisp's Meta Object Protocol (MOP), > Kiczales should know much better. While MOP and Lisp are far from > perfect, their support for metaprogramming doesn't require anything > near the intellectual mutilations required to cram these "concepts" > into Java. > > I'd like to hear more, though - is there a particular EWD that got you > thinking about this? Check out the discussion pages on wikipedia for "Concern" and "Separation of concerns"