| advertise add site services publishers database health videos | ![]() | about toolbar stats live show health store more stuff JOIN/LOGIN |
OBJECT-ORIENTED PROGRAMMING AND APL benbest.com | Disease Management and Wellness Coaching Programs: Results-Oriented... myhealthcoach.com | Listening Program For the Emotions: For Developing the Masculine Aspect ardenwilken.com |
In computing, aspect-oriented programming (AOP) is a programming paradigm in which secondary or supporting functions are isolated from the main program's business logic. It aims to increase modularity by allowing the separation of cross-cutting concerns, forming a basis for aspect-oriented software development. AOP includes programming techniques and tools that support the modularisation of concerns at the level of the source code, while aspect-oriented software development refers to a whole engineering discipline.
[edit] OverviewAspect-oriented programming entails breaking down a program into distinct parts (so-called concerns, cohesive areas of functionality). All programming paradigms support some level of grouping and encapsulation of concerns into separate, independent entities by providing abstractions (e.g. procedures, modules, classes, methods) that can be used to implement, abstract and compose these concerns. But some concerns defy these forms of implementation and are called crosscutting concerns because they "cut across" multiple abstractions in a program. Logging is a common example of a crosscutting concern because a logging strategy necessarily affects every single logged part of the system. Logging thereby crosscuts all logged classes and methods. All AOP implementations have some crosscutting expressions that encapsulate each concern in one place. The difference between implementations lies in the power, safety, and usability of the constructs provided. For example, interceptors that specify the methods to intercept express a limited form of crosscutting, without much support for type-safety or debugging. AspectJ has a number of such expressions and encapsulates them in a special class, an aspect. For example, an aspect can alter the behavior of the base code (the non-aspect part of a program) by applying advice (additional behavior) at various join points (points in a program) specified in a quantification or query called a pointcut (that detects whether a given join point matches). An aspect can also make binary-compatible structural changes to other classes, like adding members or parents. [edit] HistoryAOP as such has a number of antecedents: the Visitor Design Pattern, CLOS MOP, and others[1]. AspectJ (perhaps the most popular general-purpose AOP package) was created by Gregor Kiczales and colleagues at Xerox PARC and made available in 2001. IBM's research team emphasized the continuity of the practice of modularizing concerns with past programming practice, and offered the more powerful (but less usable) Hyper/J and Concern Manipulation Environment, which have not seen wide usage. EmacsLisp changelog added AOP related code in version 19.28. The examples in this article use AspectJ as it is the most widely known of AOP languages. [edit] Motivation and basic conceptsTypically, an aspect is scattered or tangled as code, making it harder to understand and maintain. It is scattered by virtue of the function (e.g. logging) being spread over a number of unrelated functions that might use its function, possibly in entirely unrelated systems, different source languages, etc. That means to change logging can require modifying all affected modules. Aspects are tangled not only with the mainline function of the systems in which they are expressed but also with each other. That means changing one concern entails understanding all the tangled concerns or having some means by which the effect of changes can be inferred. For example, consider a banking application with a conceptually very simple method for transferring an amount from one account to another:[2] void transfer(Account fromAcc, Account toAcc, int amount) { if (fromAcc.getBalance() < amount) { throw new InsufficientFundsException(); } fromAcc.withdraw(amount); toAcc.deposit(amount); } However, this transfer method overlooks certain considerations that would be necessary for a deployed application. It requires security checks to verify that the current user has the authorization to perform this operation. The operation should be in a database transaction in order to prevent accidental data loss. For diagnostics, the operation should be logged to the system log. And so on. A simplified version with all those new concerns would look somewhat like this: void transfer(Account fromAccount, Account toAccount, int amount) throws Exception { if (!getCurrentUser().canPerform(OP_TRANSFER)) { throw new SecurityException(); } if (amount < 0) { throw new NegativeTransferException(); } if (fromAccount.getBalance() < amount) { throw new InsufficientFundsException(); } Transaction tx = database.newTransaction(); try { fromAccount.withdraw(amount); toAccount.deposit(amount); tx.commit(); systemLog.logOperation(OP_TRANSFER, fromAccount, toAccount, amount); } catch(Exception e) { tx.rollback(); throw e; } } In the previous example other interests have become tangled with the basic functionality (sometimes called the business logic concern). Transactions, security, and logging all exemplify cross-cutting concerns. Also consider what happens if we suddenly need to change (for example) the security considerations for the application. In the program's current version, security-related operations appear scattered across numerous methods, and such a change would require a major effort. Therefore, we find that the cross-cutting concerns do not get properly encapsulated in their own modules. This increases the system complexity and makes evolution considerably more difficult. AOP attempts to solve this problem by allowing the programmer to express cross-cutting concerns in stand-alone modules called aspects. Aspects can contain advice (code joined to specified points in the program) and inter-type declarations (structural members added to other classes). For example, a security module can include advice that performs a security check before accessing a bank account. The pointcut defines the times (join points) that a bank account can be accessed, and the code in the advice body defines how the security check is implemented. That way, both the check and the places can be maintained in one place. Further, a good pointcut can anticipate later program changes, so if another developer creates a new method to access the bank account, the advice will apply to the new method when it executes. AOP can be thought of as a debugging tool or as a user level tool. Advice should be reserved for the cases where you cannot get the function changed (user level) (from Emacs Documentation) or do not want to change the function in production code (debugging). [edit] Join point modelsThe advice-related component of an aspect-oriented language defines a join point model (JPM). A JPM defines three things:
Join point models can be compared based on the join points exposed, how join points are specified, the operations permitted at the join points, and the structural enhancements that can be expressed. [edit] AspectJ's join point model
execution(* set*(*))
"Dynamic" PCDs check runtime types and bind variables. For example this(Point)
"Scope" PCDs limit the lexical scope of the join point. For example within(com.company.*)
Pointcuts can be composed and named for reuse. For example pointcut set() : execution(* set*(*) ) && this(Point) && within(com.company.*);
after() : set() { Display.update(); }
[edit] Other potential join point modelsThere are other kinds of JPMs. All advice languages can be defined in terms of their JPM. For example a hypothetical aspect language for UML may have the following JPM:
[edit] Inter-type declarationsInter-type declarations provide a way to express crosscutting concerns affecting the structure of modules. Also known as open classes, this enables programmers to declare in one place members or parents of another class, typically in order to combine all the code related to a concern in one aspect. For example, if the crosscutting display-update concern were instead implemented using visitors, an inter-type declaration using the visitor pattern would look like this in AspectJ: aspect DisplayUpdate { void Point.acceptVisitor(Visitor v) { v.visit(this); } // other crosscutting code... }
It is a requirement that any structural additions be compatible with the original class, so that clients of the existing class continue to operate, unless the AOP implementation can expect to control all clients at all times. [edit] ImplementationThere are two different ways AOP programs can affect other programs, depending on the underlying languages and environments: (1) a combined program is produced, valid in the original language and indistinguishable from an ordinary program to the ultimate interpreter; and (2) the ultimate interpreter or environment is updated to understand and implement AOP features. The difficulty of changing environments means most implementations produce compatible combination programs through a process that has come to be known as weaving, which is special case of program transformation. The same AOP language can be implemented through a variety of weaving techniques, so the semantics of a language should never be understood in terms of the weaving implementation. Only the speed of an implementation and its ease of deployment are affected by which method of combination is used. Source-level weaving can be implemented using preprocessors (as C++ was implemented originally in CFront) that require access to program source files. However, Java's well-defined binary form enables bytecode weavers to work with any Java program in .class-file form. Bytecode weavers can be deployed during the build process or, if the weave model is per-class, during class loading. AspectJ started with source-level weaving in 2001, delivered a per-class bytecode weaver in 2002, and offered advanced load-time support after the integration of AspectWerkz in 2005. Any solution that combines programs at runtime has to provide views that segregate them properly to maintain the programmer's segregated model. Java's bytecode support for multiple source files enables any debugger to step through a properly woven .class file in a source editor. However, some third-party decompilers are unable to process woven code because they expect code produced by Javac rather than all supported bytecode forms (see also "Problems", below). Another alternative is deploy-time weaving.[3] This basically implies post-processing, but rather than patching the generated code, this weaving approach subclasses existing classes so that the modifications are introduced by method-overriding. The existing classes remain untouched, even at runtime, and all existing tools (debuggers, profilers, etc.) can be used during development. A similar approach has already proven itself in the implementation of many Java EE application servers, such as IBM's WebSphere. [edit] TerminologyThe following are some standard terminology used in Aspect-oriented programming:
[edit] Comparison to other programming paradigmsAspects emerged out of object-oriented programming and computational reflection. AOP languages have functionality similar to, but more restricted than metaobject protocols. Aspects relate closely to programming concepts like subjects, mixins, and delegation. Other ways to use aspect-oriented programming paradigms include Composition Filters and the hyperslices approach. Since at least the 1970s, developers have been using forms of interception and dispatch-patching that are similar to some of the implementation techniques for AOP, but these never had the semantics that the crosscutting specifications were written in one place. Designers have considered alternative ways to achieve separation of code, such as C#'s partial types, but such approaches lack a quantification mechanism that allows reaching several join points of the code with one declarative statement. [edit] Adoption issuesProgrammers need to be able to read code and understand what is happening in order to prevent errors.[4] Even with proper education, understanding crosscutting concerns can be difficult without proper support for visualizing both static structure and the dynamic flow of a program. Visualizing crosscutting concerns is just beginning to be supported in IDEs, as is support for aspect code assist and refactoring. Given the power of AOP, if a programmer makes a logical mistake in expressing crosscutting, it can lead to widespread program failure. Conversely, another programmer may change the join points in a program – e.g., by renaming or moving methods – in ways that were not anticipated by the aspect writer, with unintended consequences. One advantage of modularizing crosscutting concerns is enabling one programmer to affect the entire system easily; as a result, such problems present as a conflict over responsibility between two or more developers for a given failure. However, the solution for these problems can be much easier in the presence of AOP, since only the aspect need be changed, whereas the corresponding problems without AOP can be much more spread out. [edit] ImplementationsAOP has been implemented (in either the language itself or as external library) for the following programming languages:
[edit] See also
[edit] Notes and references
[edit] Further reading
[edit] External links
|
| ↑ top of page ↑ | about thumbshots |