there's more to it than "Controller factory", since the FW also creates Filters, ViewComponents, perhaps also Helpers, and whatnot.
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 3:52 AM, hammett <[email protected]> wrote: > That doesnt tell me anything. Using an ioc container to compose the > application side of the equation is one thing, completely orthogonal > to the framework being used to activate your controllers, and how it > composes itself. There's a boundary of Fx and client code. The > controller factory currently is the man in the middle. What would be > different if we had such integration? > > I still can't see the value, and the poll doesn't prove or disprove > anything. > > 2010/7/17 John Simons <[email protected]>: > > From my point of view, the point is that as Ken previously mention most > MR users are already using it with container integration (we also had a poll > on this) and I would bet that most are using the Windsor container, so why > not give the users what they want out of the box? > > > -- > Cheers, > hammett > http://hammett.castleproject.org/ > > -- > 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. > > -- Ken Egozi. http://www.kenegozi.com/blog http://www.delver.com http://www.musicglue.com http://www.castleproject.org http://www.idcc.co.il - הכנס הקהילתי הראשון למפתחי דוטנט - בואו בהמוניכם -- 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.
