About your ideas, inline On 21 Sty, 13:57, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> wrote: > Now that a new version of Windsor is out, Krzysztof has brought to my > attention the need to plan the next version. > I thought about this for a while and I think that this is my initial list of > things that I would like to see in the next version of Windsor. > > - InjectMembers(instance) - resolve dependencies on an existing instance > without registering the type in the container > That would be useful for situations where the instance is created by > someone else (like the Page instance in ASP.Net WebForms).
I'm not a fan of this, but if there's demand... > - Add something like StructureMap Registries, just to allow standartized > approach to configue the container. > - inherit container ? > - facilities ? > - The goal here is just to have a standard recommended way of doing > it, rather than putting it in Application_Start - with convention based fluent API, I don't see it as an issue. And we do have already ways of abstracting it, most notably IWindsorInstaller that work like Autofac's Modules and SM Registries AFAICT > - Consider adding attributes like [Service] - to make auto registration > easier. +1 > - Convention based registration for fluent stuff > - IFoo -> Foo > - IFoo -> FooImpl > - IFoo -> FooService - I'm not sure what you mean by that... > - Generate proxies to match up lifestyles of components that have > different life styles. I thought about this as well, but then we bump into limitations of proxies plus that works only for interfaces. > - So if I am singleton and depends on request scope stuff, I get a > proxy that match that up. > - Global settings - make it nicer to: > - Default Lifestyle setting > - Default disposable tracking setting +1, we might also make it inheritable from parent container. > - Consolidate the Windsor & MicroKernel assemblies, I don't see a good > reason why we still have this split between them. +1. In this case there's no good reason to keep Core and DynamicProxy apart any longer either (main reason for this IIRC was so that MicroKernel does not depend on DP). Also do we want to really keep having two containers, or do we make IWindsorContainer inherit IKernel and merge DefaultKernel with WindsorContainer? > > Thoughts?
-- 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.
