Re: Aspect Oriented Programming in context of lightweight languages.

[Michael Vanier <address@hidden>]

> Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:46:00 +0100
> From: Pascal Costanza <costanza@iai.uni-bonn.de>
> 
> Matthew Estes wrote:
> >     I've been reading on Aspect Oriented Programming for a while, and I 
> > was having a hard time getting my head around it. On the surface, it 
> > seems useful to me, but it seems everyone loves the "adding logging to 
> > an application example", and other problems solved by it aren't just 
> > busting out of my head.
> 
> You could rightfully say that AOP is a continuation of the work that had 
> been done in the context of Common Lisp's metaobject protocol (MOP). 
> After all, Gregor Kiczales, who coined the term aspect-oriented 
> programming, also worked on the MOP.

I read somewhere (perhaps in an interview) where Kiczales said that CLOS
was too powerful for most programmers to make good use of, and AOP was his
attempt to simplify the underlying ideas and make them accessible to more
programmers.  I'm paraphrasing; if anyone finds the original source, please
post a link.

Mike