[Nitro] AOP with nitro

George Moschovitis george.moschovitis at gmail.com
Tue Apr 12 00:56:25 EDT 2005


> I'm tempted to agree with this, but now is better than later for getting
> in any worthwhile additions with the least concern for breaking things.

Exactly, and I think this AOP thing will be worth the extra effort.
 
> If AOP can help simplify the API and object model, such that adding more
> features does not require API changes, that would be worth waiting for.
>   Depending, of course, and just how long is the wait.

I 'll send you later today some code for review. I have a simple
implementation ready.

> I'd would ask, though, that certain naming conventions be nailed down,
> even if APIs may change.   I think, for example, that both Component and
> ...
> too, need clarification.

You are right, trying extra hard to nail these things down. Regarding
the template name I don't like .sx after all. It implies [S]erver side
and [X]ml, neither of which is mandatory. For example, templates are
used by the Mailer subsystem and may not use XML. Any other ideas? How
about .t and .ti ?

About the Controller-Component thing, it will stay as Controller.

regards,
George.



-- 
http://nitro.rubyforge.org
http://www.joy.gr



More information about the Nitro-general mailing list