AOP sucks?
Joseph thinks AOP is inobvious and makes it hard for the programmer to understand what is going on. I don’t understand why he says that. The first time I read about AOP I was thinking, this is so obvious, why didn’t i think of that before. Just put related code together, with a specification of where and when it should be executed. So clean, so obvious and so easy to understand.
In Joseph’s security example, I would say that AOP makes it all so much easier to understand for the programmer. AOP is great to achieve simple solutions.
30 Mar 2003 |
March 30th, 2003 at 8:37 pm
It makes perfect sense for many applications, including security. But when something goes wrong, where do YOU look for things?
My point is not that “AOP sucks!” (Note that I never said that, directly, outside of the quoted title.) My point is that the abstraction is easy to buy into, because it sounds very … neat and appeals to the abstract tendencies. That it’s appealing to certain tendencies among us doesn’t make it simple or good, and there’s a real tendency for us as programmers to choose implementations that impress us instead of implementations that actually help us just get the job done.
It’s a VERY fine line, and I’ll note I’m certainly unafraid to cross it when I need or want to. I’m just mindful of it.