> -----Original Message----- > From: Niclas Hedhman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > On Monday 08 March 2004 16:09, Leo Sutic wrote: > > -oOo- > > > > One problem is about interdependencies between aspects. Suppose you make > > logging an aspect. Then you make security an aspect. The implementation > > of > > the security aspect would likely like to log some messages. So how would > > this be done? > > What is the Requirement? > > * SecurityAspect needs to reach a LoggerAspect. * > > We are not re-implementing the container at a higher level (a.k.a > uber-container). We don't need to make all the "magic" once again at this > level.
Yes we need to watch for this I think Leo's trying to avoid it with this email. > Instead, borrow from Pico; > > LoggerAspect loggerAspect = new LoggerAspectImpl( something ); > kernel.addAspect( loggerAspect ); You're dead on by looking at Pico for answers here. > > -oOo- > > > > Third problem: I have a set of configuration files. Whose responsibility > > is it to load them and turn them into some kind of application? > > As I see it, the 'starting container' (which instantiates the Aspects) > will > for each Aspect need to provide enough information, for that Aspect to > become > operational, in its constructor. > > I don't think there is any concept of configuration in this 'ultra-thin' > mechanism. I agree there may be some configuration beans that are setup and fed into the constructor of these Aspects. In that sense there is none of this XML based configuration going on. This kind of Configurable functionality itself comes in as an aspect later. Alex --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
