Jonathan, Thanks for your reponse.
Does anyone know the status of the Boost.Interfaces Library proposed by Chris Diggins in 2004?
It was written by me, inspired by an article that Chris wrote in CUJ.
Oops ... sorry about that. For what it's worth I also read chris' 2004 CUJ article. This was one of the reasons I started to be hopeful that someone had already moved ahead and taken a stab at implementing a "boosted " version of the lib (vs. the aspectc++ preproc approach).
I never officially proposed the library; I just requested comments. Although there seemed to be quite a bit of interest, I became very busy and didn't have time to work on it.
However, I'm working on it again now -- as of last week -- and hope to request comments soon and then to propose it for inclusion.
That's great. Out of curiosity are you shooting to have a working draft ready for some particular time?
I have found a few references to it on the internet, including one on the Boost Wiki, but it seems to not have ever made it into the official Boost library.
I am interest in exploring how Aspect-Oriented Programming techniques might be incorporate into an existing code-base, and would prefer to use a library based solution, rather than a special preprocessor (eg. apsectc++). Since Boost has come to the rescue in the past (with elegant solutions), in this respect, I thought I would start here.
I don't know a lot about AOP; the support for AOP in the interfaces library was based on another article by Chris and wasn't very well developed. I think I want to include pretty comprehensive support, or none at all, and I haven't decided which yet. Sorry I can't be more helpful right now.
It funny, though I have been annoyed for years by the design issues that AOP attempts to address, I only became aware of AOP (as a formal technique) recently. So, it looks like we are in the same boat !! Have you found any good papers/books/videos that you feel talk about AOP at the depth of level for which you want to provide support? As with any techniques I am sure the 80/20 rule applies to AOP (i.e. 20% of features will deliver 80% of the benefit). Though I have never been part of the formal boost lib proposal process, I wonder if getting a solid/minimal subset of AOP features into a boost lib might do as a first cut to proposing the lib. Thanks again. I look forward to what you come up with! Martin _______________________________________________
Boost-users mailing list Boost-users@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
-- Martin de Lasa