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