> The fiirst issue, that surfaced itself in this bug report is IMHO wrong
> assumption that DP takes about types implementing ISerializable.
> An implicit contract exists that types implementing ISerializable must also
> have a specific constructor. DP checks for existence of this constructor,
> and in case this constructor is not present, it throws.
> The thing is, this constructor is not required for type to be perfectly fine
> serializable. Instead a IObjectReference interface can be used to delegate
> serialization/deserialization responsibilities to. In fact, this is how
> interface proxies are deserialized in DP, though they do not have the
> constructor.

As I just wrote on the other thread, as I didn't see this message, DP
also uses object references (for all proxies, not only interface
proxies), so supporting classes using their own IObjectReference
wouldn't be that easy.

> The other issue is proxying proxy types specifically. I for example wanted
> to stub a stub type with Rhino.Mock in one test.
> If we wanted to enable this, we would have to change the way proxy fields
> are stored in/retrieved from SerializationInfo object, since currently inner
> type will try to add values under the same key as outer type, which will
> result in exception.
>
> The question remains however, if this corner case is worth pursuing.

I'm not sure as well - would you really need to serialize proxies of
proxies? Or, in your case, serialize a stubbed stub?

We could solve this by nesting the SerializationInfos in some way,
although I'm not sure whether this is possible. Can you put a
SerializationInfo into a SerializationInfo? Probably not. You can't
even check whether a key already exists, can you?

Fabian

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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