"What do I have" would make the TypedFactoryFacility more useful: it could
check that all of the dependencies were available that weren't parameters to
the factory method.  That is, "what do I need" would be useful as well.

While we're on the subject of diagnostics,
at the moment there's a hard to fix bug where Windsor will report a
missing dependency on an object when in fact the dependency is missing
on the interceptor.


JMB

2010/1/22 Krzysztof Koźmic (2) <[email protected]>

> moreover
> - something similar to StructureMaps AssertConfigurationIsValid/
> WharDoIHave (although I would have this in external service, not the
> container itself)
> - build in some diagnostics into the container, even if just the basic
> one... similar to how its done in DynamicProxy or NHibernate...
>
> On 22 Sty, 08:44, Krzysztof Koźmic (2) <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Gauthier,
> >
> > Neat idea, but I'd rather see it "deeper in" the API, something like:
> > AllTypes.Where(Component.HasAttribute(typeof(ServiceAttribute)))
> >
> > Krzysztof
> >
> > On 22 Sty, 03:39, Gauthier Segay <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > just a small idea:
> >
> > > > >    - Consider adding attributes like [Service] - to make auto
> registration
> > > > >    easier.
> >
> > > > +1
> >
> > > container.Register(AllTypes.TaggedWithAttribute(typeof
> > > (ServiceAttribute)))
> >
> > > container.Register(AllTypes.TaggedWithInterface(typeof(IServiceTag)))
> >
> > > On 21 jan, 14:54, Krzysztof Ko 1/4 mic (2) <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > > 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]<castle-project-devel%[email protected]>
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
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