Talk:Aspect weaver/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Ironholds (talk) 13:24, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Lede
[edit]- "An aspect weaver is a metaprogramming utility designed to take instructions specified by aspects (isolated representations of a significant concepts in a program) in aspect-oriented languages in an effort to generate the final implementation code. " - repetition of "in"
- Done Addressed --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 18:21, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- What is "advice" and why is it italicised?
- Done? advice is the technical term for instructions to an aspect weaver. I have clarified that in the lede. Do you think this is ok? --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 18:21, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Motivation
[edit]- "business-related concerns. Businesses are often concerned " -repetition
- "often both an expense both money-wise and time-wise" - repetition
- "Primary concerns for roadmaps for the adoption of new technologies tends" - repetition. Also, "concerns" is plural while "tends" is singular.
- "This enforces that any existing object-oriented code will " - enforces/ensures.
- Done all of the above --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 18:32, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- Link aspect-orientated and object-orientated programming.
- Semi-done Did the OOP link. AOP is linked in the lede. Should it be linked here too? I thought things should only be linked the first time they are encountered. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 18:32, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- Nope. Take Court of Chancery for example; a reader cannot be expected, 2/3rds of the way down, to know what equity is. I appreciate that your article is smaller, but the same logic applies; having to scroll up and search for a term (or just use the search box, taking them away from the article) vexes people. Ironholds (talk) 21:03, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- Done Very logical, I was just unsure --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 22:25, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- Nope. Take Court of Chancery for example; a reader cannot be expected, 2/3rds of the way down, to know what equity is. I appreciate that your article is smaller, but the same logic applies; having to scroll up and search for a term (or just use the search box, taking them away from the article) vexes people. Ironholds (talk) 21:03, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Implementation
[edit]- Link "classes", "aspects", "bytecode". Remember, the audience is made up of laypeople.
- All of these are linked in the lead. Again, should they be linked here as well, or only the first time they are encountered? --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 18:36, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- See above. Ironholds (talk) 21:03, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- All of these are linked in the lead. Again, should they be linked here as well, or only the first time they are encountered? --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 18:36, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- concepts? Surely "concept"
- Done That segment was poorly worded anyway. I rephrased it, and the word "concept" disappeared. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 18:36, 17 February 2010 (UTC)