+1 for the original question, I have no objections. There are a bunch of comments that are probably still relevant from the Sep 2009 discussion on this exact topic: http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel/browse_thread/thread/14672e94f7cebbcd
2011/3/1 Krzysztof Koźmic <[email protected]> > Hi, > > I've been looking at extending Windsor's DefaultInterface method for > matching services to components to support generics and I found that in many > cases the naming pattern uses plural form. > > so you have: > > public class Customer*s*Repository:IRepository<Customer> { } > > so to match that it would make sense to use Inflector to pluralize the name > of the class to match the service properly. > > So does anyone have any objections against moving Inflector class for > ActiveRecord to Castle.Core.dll ? > > I think it has more generic usage than just for AR. > > Krzysztof > > -- > 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. > -- Jono -- 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.
