AOP use cases

[Terry Reedy]

"Jacek Generowicz" <jacek.generowicz at cern.ch> wrote in message
news:tyfvfjrp2at.fsf at lxplus026.cern.ch...
> "Terry Reedy" <tjreedy at udel.edu> writes:
>
> > The funny thing about this example is that its success critically
depends
> > on fib *not* being 'optimized' by having the recursive calls being
either
> > compiled as or replaced by (as with Hettinger's recent proposal)
efficient
> > local calls.

To be more precise, the example depends on dynamic lookup not being
disabled *before* the wrapping.  But I believe *after* would be ok.

> Please remember that the _point_ of the example is to show what
> separation of concerns is, in the context of the claim that C moving
> IO from language to library constitutes separation of concerns.

That may have been *your* point in writing it, but given that I never
seriously considered the claim you refuted as being worth much attention, I
had a different point in reading your example ;-)

> Picking nits in the implementation details is completely missing the
point.

Given that I expect to someday make use of Hettinger's recipe, it is not
nitpicking for me to notice the interaction between the two patterns and
how to mix them and get the intended result.

Terry J. Reedy