Spring AOP vs AspectJ [英] Spring AOP vs AspectJ

问题描述

我的印象是，Spring AOP最适合用于特定于应用程序的任务，例如安全性，日志记录，事务等，因为它使用自定义Java5注释作为框架。然而，AspectJ似乎更加友好的设计模式。

任何人都可以在Spring应用程序中突出显示使用Spring AOP和AspectJ的各种优缺点？

解决方案

Spring-AOP优点

• 使用比AspectJ更简单，因为您不必使用LTW（加载时编织）或AspectJ编译器。


• 当您使用基于Spring AOP的@Aspect注解时，可以更改为AspectJ AOP。


• 这使用Proxy模式和Decorator
  模式

Spring-AOP缺点

• 是基于代理的AOP，所以基本上你只能使用方法执行切入点。


• 在同一个类中调用另一个方法时，不适用方面。



• Spring-AOP无法为Spring工厂不创建的任何内容添加一个方面

AspectJ优点

• 这支持所有切入点。这意味着你可以做任何事情。


• 运行时开销比Spring AOP少。

AspectJ Cons

• 小心。检查您的方面是否仅被编织成您想要编织的。


• 您需要使用AspectJ Compiler进行额外的构建过程，或者必须设置LTW（加载时编织）

I am under the impression that Spring AOP is best used for application specific tasks such as security, logging, transactions, etc. as it uses custom Java5 annotations as a framework. However, AspectJ seems to be more friendly design-patterns wise.

Can anyone highlight the various pros and cons of using Spring AOP vs AspectJ in a Spring application?

解决方案

Spring-AOP Pros

• It is simpler to use than AspectJ, since you don't have to use LTW (load-time weaving) or the AspectJ compiler.
• This can be change to AspectJ AOP when you use @Aspect annotation based Spring AOP.
• This use Proxy pattern and Decorator pattern

Spring-AOP Cons

• This is proxy-based AOP, so basically you can only use method-execution pointcut.
• Aspects aren't applied when calling another method within the same class.
• There can be a little runtime overhead.
• Spring-AOP cannot add an aspect to anything that is not created by the Spring factory

AspectJ Pros

• This supports all pointcuts. This means you can do anything.
• There is less runtime overhead than that of Spring AOP.

AspectJ Cons

• Be careful. Check if your aspects are weaved to only what you wanted to be weaved.
• You need extra build process with AspectJ Compiler or have to setup LTW (load-time weaving)

这篇关于Spring AOP vs AspectJ的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！