Hi,
I wrote about it some time ago in the context of using WCF configuration 
file as sole source of information for resolving WCF components.
My idea was to extend the way IKernel resolves components. Right now 
when it does not have a component registered (or we're trying to 
register asbtract component as you wrote) it throws.
Alternatively, to support this kind of scenarios, we might extend it 
(via facility?) that would be called in those situations (i.e. while 
registering otherwise illegal component, or while resolving unregistered 
component).
It would require two methods:

*bool CanProvide(Type componentType, string name, IKernel 
kernel);//kernel throws when it returns false
object Provide(Type componentType, string name, IKernel kernel); //OR
IHandler Provide(Type componentType, string name, IKernel kernel, out 
IHandler[] dependencies);*

This is only an initial idea and it would have to be thought through to 
ensure that it easily fits with other aspects of the container.

This solution would be IMHO flexible enough to handle I think all of WCF 
needs (incl, not-yet-implemented support for config file), AND would 
easily solve the problem you described.

Thoughts?


Ayende Rahien pisze:
> I just applied a patch to detect and give a good error if we are 
> trying to register a component whose implementation is abstract.
> That broke the WCF facility, which allow you to register just the 
> interface, and rely on the WCF machinery to provide the real 
> implementation. 
> Currently I "fixed" the build by making sure that the test in the code 
> specify an implementation, but considering a common case for the WCF 
> client facility, we won't _have_ an implementation.
> Any suggestions for solving this?
>
> >


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Castle Project Development List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to