objectiveviewdiscussion Google Group

Aspect Oreinted Programming

cplus_develo...@yahoo.com (Mohsena) — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 05:27:48 UT

Hello All:
I want to know about Apsect Oriented Programming and how it affects
design and how we can use it in rafractory.
Sincerely yours Mohsena

There Is One unseen Technique That Can Make You A respectable Living on the Internet…..As you've often heard,

artic...@blastarticles.com (anil vij) — Thu, 26 Apr 2007 05:29:47 UT

Message-Id: <20070426052947.3F9B8788EB@107 129-app1.anj.com>
There Is One unseen Technique That Can Make You A respectable Living on the Internet…..As you've often heard,
Its content-- useful information that will make visitors comes to you again and again. The Internet is driven by information, and the fact is, people are more concerned with information than they are with how fancy and beautiful your site looks. That's what makes article submission the No.1 choice to drive targeted traffic to your website.

Get more traffic and free publicity by submitting articles

artic...@blastarticles.com (anil vij) — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 04:56:14 UT

Message-Id: <20070425045613.D260E78873@107 129-app1.anj.com>
Get more traffic and free publicity by submitting articles
Many writers are thrashing about with the decision of whether or not to write "for free" - however - unless you are a wealthy, professionally published author - there are many advantages to writing articles and offering them for free publication online.

Get more traffic by submitting Articles

artic...@blastarticles.com (anil vij) — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 05:54:22 UT

Message-Id: <20070420055421.E9ECD78AB3@107 129-app1.anj.com>
Get more traffic by submitting Articles
Article submission is perhaps one of the best ways to give weight to your products and services on the Internet....that is, if done correctly, but like link exchange, it is also abused. But a fact is that Article Marketing is not about to die. It's alive and strong!

[ANN] ObjectiveView 'Community' SD Magazine

a...@ratio.co.uk (Adam Weremczuk) — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 17:51:02 UT

ObjectiveView is a free 'not for profit' software development magazine.
It is a collobaration between the editor, writers and web distribution
partners.
No money changes hands between anyone involved in the magazine.
Issue 9 had 40,000+ hits. And is still clocking up 2k hits a month.
We're posting this message to newsgroups that are relevent to the

Re: ovdiscussion Re: Layering and packages

davidkal...@yahoo.com (David Allen) — Fri, 20 Oct 2006 21:09:04 UT

Yes, the diagram (Figure 11-2 in RCM's "Agile Software Development" is sparse on explanation for layering.
In fact, it's just plain vague. Well, the theory seems confident, but the class-like boxes are a bit ambiguous ("Mechanism Layer?", "Utility Layer")
Though most of the rest of the book is usefully precise.

Re: ovdiscussion Re: Layering and packages

markcollinsc...@gmail.com (mcc@ratio.co.uk) — Fri, 20 Oct 2006 13:18:40 UT

David,
I've had some discussions with Bob about this - though I don't think we
reached any definate conclusions. One important point is that "Policy,
Mechanism and Utility" are a little undefined - in that little explanation
is given of what they actually mean (Martin Fowler uses these terms too). So

Re: ovdiscussion Re: Layering and packages

davidkal...@yahoo.com (David Allen) — Thu, 19 Oct 2006 18:07:37 UT

David Kreth AllenApplication DeveloperCarlson School of ManagementUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolis, MN
Yes. There are automated tests for much of the code.
I'll see what I can do.
I can't find electronic copies anywhere so I must scan the pages first.
That may be one of my confusions.I notice his figure 11-2 shows lower layers depending on higher layers.

Re: ovdiscussion Re: Layering and packages

markcollinsc...@gmail.com (mcc@ratio.co.uk) — Thu, 19 Oct 2006 16:36:41 UT

David,
[more detailed reply as promised!]
Thanks for the thoughtful response, Mark.
It may be the case (I can't tell without some detailed information) that
there really should be only one library. CRP states "package things together
that are used together". If the same library API is necessary for 20 Apps,

Re: ovdiscussion Re: Layering and packages

markcollinsc...@gmail.com (mcc@ratio.co.uk) — Wed, 18 Oct 2006 15:05:51 UT

David,
Will give a more detailed response later, but RCM's CCP & CRP fit very
nicely with the ARM. The ARM focuses on horizontal division of code into
packages. Once that's been sorted, the CCP and the CRP can be used to
subdivide each horizontal slice into packages.
Ciao,
Mark.

Re: ovdiscussion Re: Layering and packages

davidkal...@yahoo.com (David Allen) — Wed, 18 Oct 2006 13:48:59 UT

Thanks for the thoughtful response, Mark.
Here are my reactions to your comments on the notion of having a single library for all shared code
First, we agree that such an arrangement is very much NOT an ideal design,
but only a transitional device to
allow me to refactor more readily while we consider a more ideal design.

Re: ovdiscussion Layering and packages

markcollinsc...@gmail.com (mcc@ratio.co.uk) — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:32:07 UT

Hi David,
I guess the biggest downside is that you get lots of code you don't need in
the library, and that makes it more difficult for newbies to learn how to
use your library API. The other potential problem I've encountered is when
libraries use database tables - each application has to create a load of

Layering and packages

davidkal...@yahoo.com (David K Allen) — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 17:50:14 UT

I enjoyed your message from April on "Meaning of layering".
I intend to study your article
[link]
more fully as it seems very informative.
But I have a question about packages:
We currently have 20+ applications in our shop.
We have maybe 10-20% of our code in 6 reusable libraries

Re: ovdiscussion Re: Procedural vs OO: Strawmen galore!

s...@ambysoft.com (Scott W. Ambler) — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:16:31 UT

<snip>
Gut feel tells me that it's not a language issue, it's a tool issue. Java
is easier to refactor, perhaps, than COBOL right now because to my
knowledge there isn't any refactoring tools. I suspect that says
something about the COBOL tools themselves, not the COBOL language.
Granted, there may be some nuances about one language over another which

Re: ovdiscussion Procedural vs OO: Strawmen galore!

davidkal...@yahoo.com (David Allen) — Tue, 18 Apr 2006 13:58:14 UT

see comments below
I currently program using an object-oriented language
(C#) but I used to program in COBOL and Pascal. I
don't see how C# or the object-oriented approach is is
intrinsically more inflexible to change than the
procedural languages that I used to use. It is the
design that is inflexible or flexible. And even then,