471,321 Members | 1,768 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
Post +

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Join Bytes to post your question to a community of 471,321 software developers and data experts.

AOP and pep 246

I am interested in AOP in python. From here one naturally (or
google-ly) reaches peak.
But peak seems to be discontinued.
Whereas pep-246 on adaptors seems to be rejected in favor of something else.

What??

Can someone please throw some light on whats the current state of the art?
Nov 1 '07 #1
8 1468
On Nov 1, 4:18 pm, "Rustom Mody" <rustompm...@gmail.comwrote:
I am interested in AOP in python. From here one naturally (or
google-ly) reaches peak.
But peak seems to be discontinued.
Whereas pep-246 on adaptors seems to be rejected in favor of something else.

What??

Can someone please throw some light on whats the current state of the art?
See http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3119
Michele Simionato

Nov 1 '07 #2
On Nov 2, 5:00 am, "Rustom Mody" <rustompm...@gmail.comwrote:
Seehttp://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3119

Thanks Michele. But there are a couple of questions on this:

a. Does one have to use python 3000 for this?
I expect ABC's to be backported to Python 2.6, but it is probably
possible to backport them down up to Python 2.2.
b. Are there more example-oriented writings on this (such as the
papers you and mertz wrote on this stuff within the older paradigm
Not that I know of (except posts in python-dev).
c. Where does peak stand today?
My understanding is that P.J. Eby has no time to follow PEAK
fully; his idea is to extract the most useful ideas from PEAK
(you may know that eggs and WSGI originated from PEAK) and to
make them available to the community as separated packages. IOW,
PEAK as a monolithic framework had no success, but pearls of PEAK
are having an enormous impact. This is yet another example of
"simple is better than complex" and the ultimate reason why AOP
a la Java was a dead idea from the beginning. Too invasive.
If you want to have success, you must start from simple
things.

Michele Simionato

Nov 2 '07 #3
On Nov 1, 4:46 pm, Kay Schluehr <kay.schlu...@gmx.netwrote:
On 1 Nov., 16:18, "Rustom Mody" <rustompm...@gmail.comwrote:
I am interested in AOP in python. From here one naturally (or
google-ly) reaches peak.
But peak seems to be discontinued.
Whereas pep-246 on adaptors seems to be rejected in favor of something else.
What??
Can someone please throw some light on whats the current state of the art?

AOP was a research that gone nowhere - at least not in its orginal
AspectJ form:
If you Verify integrated circuits then you might know of the Specman e
language (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specman), That pre-dates
AspectJ and is very much
alive. Its AOP feature-set is different to that of AspectJ.
Our Verification engineers find the AOP paradigm to be very
productive. It
allows them to write a testbench in e and use AOP to extend it to
create
different testcases.

Just found a version of the LRM online (search for 'extend'):
http://www.ieee1647.org/downloads/prelim_e_lrm.pdf

- Paddy.

Nov 2 '07 #4
Carl Banks wrote:
>
AOP is a programming paradigm in the same way indie is a genre of
film.
I like your explanation! Heck, if it were more directly Python-related,
I'd nominate this line for QOTW.
Nov 2 '07 #5
I find these viewpoints interesting in their divergence. At the risk
of being simplistic:

Kay: AOP == AspectJ or thereabouts. A failure in itself and
uninteresting to pythonistas

Michele: AOP not very interesting though does good work himself in
decorators, metaclasses and other such AOPish stuff
Carl: Aspect == something (anything?) cognitively coherent. AOP
(rather AAP) means: When a language feature supports an aspect use it,
when not wriggle round it. Python requires less wriggling than java.
A powerful conceptual viewpoint but unhelpful to the developer...

My own feeling: Python is more AOP ready than java. So lighter-weight
techniques like Michele's decorator should go further. But
methodology not yet formulated.
Nov 3 '07 #6
On Nov 3, 12:17 am, "Rustom Mody" <rustompm...@gmail.comwrote:
My own feeling: Python is more AOP ready than java. So lighter-weight
techniques like Michele's decorator should go further. But
methodology not yet formulated.
To clarify: my view is that lightweight techniques are enough and
that a general methodology (in the sense of AspectJ) should NOT be
formulated. Not everything should be formalized, give powerful
enough tools to the programmer and let her do her work.
The fundamental flaw underlying AspectJ is the ambition
to put together a monster intended for all uses and purposes.
I could cite some relevant aphorisms, such as "Don't give a man
a fish: teach him to fish" or "Programming languages should be
designed not by piling feature on top of feature, but by removing
the weaknesses and restrictions that make additional features
appear necessary" (Clinger).

Michele Simionato

Nov 3 '07 #7
AOP was a research that gone nowhere - at least not in its orginal
AspectJ form ...
I think it might be worth pointing out, though, that there is still
significant interest in AOP in the Java community, in the form or
interest in the Spring Framework. See, for instance:
http://www.onjava.com/pub/a/onjava/2...springaop.html

This article was written in 2004. It has taken some time for
awareness of Spring to penetrate the Java community, but it appears to
be happening in a serious way.

-- Thank-god-I-don't-have-to-learn-all-this-Java-superstructure-stuff-
ly yours,
Steve Ferg

Nov 13 '07 #8
On 13 Nov., 15:17, Steve <st...@ferg.orgwrote:
AOP was a research that gone nowhere - at least not in its orginal
AspectJ form ...

I think it might be worth pointing out, though, that there is still
significant interest in AOP in the Java community, in the form or
interest in the Spring Framework. See, for instance:http://www.onjava.com/pub/a/onjava/2...springaop.html

This article was written in 2004. It has taken some time for
awareness of Spring to penetrate the Java community, but it appears to
be happening in a serious way.
Yes, I knew about Spring AOP but didn't keep much attention. Is AOP
used a lot in the Spring context or is it just a fancy, experimental
feature which was just cool to implement at some time?
-- Thank-god-I-don't-have-to-learn-all-this-Java-superstructure-stuff-
ly yours,
As I understand Spring it was part of a liberation wave from J2EE in
the Java community: return to POJOs and dependency injection as the
main composition technique. Spring is probably not that bad.
Steve Ferg
Nov 13 '07 #9

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.

Similar topics

3 posts views Thread by William C. White | last post: by
2 posts views Thread by Albert Ahtenberg | last post: by
3 posts views Thread by James | last post: by
reply views Thread by Ollivier Robert | last post: by
1 post views Thread by Richard Galli | last post: by
4 posts views Thread by Albert Ahtenberg | last post: by
1 post views Thread by inderjit S Gabrie | last post: by
2 posts views Thread by Jack | last post: by
3 posts views Thread by Sandwick | last post: by
reply views Thread by rosydwin | last post: by

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.