Subject-oriented programming: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 14:59, 1 May 2012

Revision as of 05:58, 22 August 2012

Line 15:

* the aspect transparently forces the cross-cutting behavior on object classes and other software entities

In the subject-oriented view, the cross-cut may be placed separately from the aspect (subject) and the behavior is not forced by the aspect, but by governed by rules of composition. Hindsight<ref>William Harrison. De-constructing and Re-constructing Aspect-Orientation, Seventh Annual Workshop on Foundations of Aspect Languages, Brussels, Belgium, 1 April 2008, edited by Gary T. Leavens , ACM Digital Library, 2008, pp. 43-50</ref> makes it also possible to distinguish aspect-oriented programming by its introduction and exploitation of the concept of a query-like [[pointcut]] to externally impose the join-points used by aspects in general ways.

In the presentation of subject-oriented programming, the join-points were deliberately restricted to field access and method call on the grounds that those were the points at which well-designed frameworks were designed to admit functional extension. The use of externally imposed pointcuts is an important linguistic capability, but remains one of the most controversial features of aspect-oriented programming.<ref>Friedrich Steimann. The paradoxical success of aspect-oriented programming, Proceedings of the 21st annual ACM SIGPLAN conference on Object-oriented programming systems, languages, and applications, Portland, Oregon, USA , 2006, pp. 481 - 497</ref>