I guess I'll have to chime in here then :) Right now I think having AOP as a framework feature is the most realistic, once Falcon fully drops we might start to see compile-time weaving, but for run-time dynamic proxies it might be an idea to make it a framework feature. I am the author of as3commons-bytecode ( http://www.as3commons.org/as3-commons-bytecode/index.html), which is the low-level bytecode manipulation library that most of the micro-frameworks are using as a basis for their AOP features. Should there be interest in somehow integrating this library I'll be happy to help out, or, if there is a need for a different kind of API, I'd still be willing to lend a hand since I've spent quite a while spelunking through the caverns of ABC bytecode :)
Roland On 9 January 2012 23:02, Matthew Poole <mattjpo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>AOP is probably a language thing, which we do not have control of. > Fair point Alex, AOP probably would better be a language feature rather > than a framework feature. Though we might see something sooner if we > implement it as a framework feature. > > Having said that if enough f the micro-architecture frameworks implement a > byte code manipulation approach perhaps that is sufficient. That poses an > interesting question in terms of what flex is and what it becomes. Is it a > UI framework, boiler plate, micro-architecture, all of the above? > > Do we need to establish what the high level goals of the framework are? > > Matt > > On 9 January 2012 20:33, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 1/9/12 12:15 PM, "Doug McCune" <d...@dougmccune.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Alex, does the Apache style of individual user contributions lend > itself > > > better to flushing this out? This is clearly something you've been > > working > > > on at Adobe, but does the fact that Flex is now an Apache project and > you > > > are acting as an individual contributor and not as an official Adobe > > person > > > matter in terms of reducing the friction of you sharing this kind of > > code? > > > i.e. Would you have held back longer from pushing this code out > publicly > > > prior to the move to Apache? > > > > I'm still trying to understand whether I am acting as an individual or as > > an > > employee of Adobe. I think it is actually the latter. Adobe still owns > > the > > work I do and it has to pass legal clearance. > > > > I believe that the key difference working with Apache is that I don't > have > > to convince managers and product managers and business folks before > > checking > > in code to Apache (but I still have to convince Legal). We didn't have > > resources to allow critical folks like me to spend too much time > exploring > > ideas. There were always deadlines to meet to make our paying customers > > happy. > > > > In Apache, I have to make sure I contribute enough shorter-term stuff to > > make the project successful so Apache Flex continues to have customers, > but > > we will hopefully have tons of folks contributing their own short-term > > stuff > > as well so I will hopefully have time to continue to massage longer-term > > ideas and get folks involved in that as well. > > > > -- > > Alex Harui > > Flex SDK Team > > Adobe Systems, Inc. > > http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui > > > > > -- regards, Roland -- Roland Zwaga Senior Consultant | Stack & Heap BVBA +32 (0)486 16 12 62 | rol...@stackandheap.com | http://www.stackandheap.com
