>Haha, yeah maybe you're right. I've always taken AOP as a loosely defined term >(like OOP), to mean the "composition of objects with cross-cutting concerns," >where DI would be a design pattern in which to achieve AOP. I didn't >realize >the term was specific to the methodology. I always use DI to compose my Spark >components anyways (ala skinning), so I guess it's a moot point for me. :)
I would actually think about it the other way. AOP can be used to facilitate DI.
