Databases
StackOverflow2013
Postsdbo
POIs AspectF (a Fluent Aspect Framework) an AOP-like design that can be used without much concern?
 

Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. POIs AspectF (a Fluent Aspect Framework) an AOP-like design that can be used without much concern?
    primarykey
    data
    text
    <p><a href="http://msmvps.com/blogs/omar/Default.aspx" rel="noreferrer">Omar Al Zabir</a> is looking for "a simpler way to do AOP style coding".</p> <p>He created a framework called <a href="http://code.google.com/p/aspectf/" rel="noreferrer">AspectF</a>, which is "a fluent and simple way to add Aspects to your code".</p> <p><strong>It is not true AOP</strong>, because it doesn't do any compile time or runtime weaving, but does it accomplish the same goals as AOP?</p> <p>Here's an example of AspectF usage:</p> <pre><code> public void InsertCustomerTheEasyWay(string firstName, string lastName, int age, Dictionary&lt;string, string&gt; attributes) { AspectF.Define .Log(Logger.Writer, "Inserting customer the easy way") .HowLong(Logger.Writer, "Starting customer insert", "Inserted customer in {1} seconds") .Retry() .Do(() =&gt; { CustomerData data = new CustomerData(); data.Insert(firstName, lastName, age, attributes); }); } </code></pre> <p>Here are some posts by the author that further clarify the aim of AspectF:</p> <ul> <li><a href="http://msmvps.com/blogs/omar/archive/2009/09/19/aspectf-fluent-way-to-put-aspects-into-your-code-for-separation-of-concern.aspx" rel="noreferrer">AspectF fluent way to put Aspects into your code for separation of concern</a> (Blog)</li> <li><a href="http://code.google.com/p/aspectf/" rel="noreferrer">AspectF</a> (google code)</li> <li><a href="http://www.codeproject.com/KB/tips/aspectf.aspx" rel="noreferrer">AspectF Fluent Way to Add Aspects for Cleaner Maintainable Code</a> (CodeProject)</li> </ul> <p>According to the author, I gather that AspectF is <strong>not designed so much as an AOP replacement</strong>, but a way to achieve "separation of concern and keep code nice and clean".</p> <p>Some thoughts/questions:</p> <ul> <li>Any thoughts on using this style of coding as project grows? </li> <li>Is it a scalable architecture?</li> <li><strike>performance concerns?</strike></li> <li>How does maintainability compare against a true AOP solution?</li> </ul>
    singulars
    1. PO
      singulars
      1. PTAnswer
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. PTQuestion
    1. USJon Schoning
    1. USJon Schoning
    plurals
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. PO
      singulars
      1. PTAnswer
    2. PO
      singulars
      1. PTAnswer
    1. VO
      singulars
      1. POIs AspectF (a Fluent Aspect Framework) an AOP-like design that can be used without much concern?
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    2. VO
      singulars
      1. POIs AspectF (a Fluent Aspect Framework) an AOP-like design that can be used without much concern?
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    3. VO
      singulars
      1. POIs AspectF (a Fluent Aspect Framework) an AOP-like design that can be used without much concern?
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    1. COThis is highly subjective, I'd make this CW
      singulars
      1. POIs AspectF (a Fluent Aspect Framework) an AOP-like design that can be used without much concern?
      1. USMauricio Scheffer
    2. COI don't want to be mean or rough, but the author of AspectF kind of missed the point of AOP. It's not AOP not because of technical choices, it's not AOP because the cross cutting concern is still entangled with business logic. Which is the precise issue AOP tries to solve.
      singulars
      1. POIs AspectF (a Fluent Aspect Framework) an AOP-like design that can be used without much concern?
      1. USJb Evain
    3. COPerhaps I've unfairly presented the famework. He indicates that one of the main goals of AspectF is "separation of concerns". You may want to check out the posts I've now included in the question to clarify the author's intent of what AspectF is actually trying to do...
      singulars
      1. POIs AspectF (a Fluent Aspect Framework) an AOP-like design that can be used without much concern?
      1. USJon Schoning
 

Querying!

 
Guidance
A row detail

Detail views are divided into sections. All the information in the data section comes from columns in the selected row. The other sections display data from other, related rows.

Related data can be related in a to-one or a to-many fashion. Captions of data related in a to-many fashion link to a list view showing a filtered view of the table.

Try moving around until you find a non-empty to-many entry and click on the label to get to one. You can move back to the root by clicking on the database name in the header.

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload