Hmmm
that is interesting. In general, Typed Factories were meant to be
stateless, I can see value in this scenario, just I'm not sure what
would be an elegant way to support it.
Why don't you just make the first factory an actual class, and for the
second one use a typed factory?
On 22/07/2011 6:33 AM, Rory Plaire wrote:
As to why: here is the question I posted on SO -
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6772484/castle-windsor-passing-a-dependency-through-2-typed-factories
Summary: I want to create a typed factory from another typed factory
but I want to add a dependency to the resolution context of the 2nd
typed factory.
I wanted to put an interceptor after the resolution of the 1st typed
factory in order to contribute this dependency to the context.
As to ExtendedHandler - it appears that the typed factory uses this as
the handler to invoke the chain of invocations, which is why I thought
it would work fine to just add another after the resolution was done
in the typed factory interceptor, if the interceptor just called
Proceed().
-r
2011/7/21 Krzysztof Koźmic <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
As far as other interceptors are concerns the factory interceptor
_is_ the implementation. You can put other interceptors before the
factory one.
Extended handler has no role in that process, it does something
else altogether.
Why would you want to put anything past the factory interceptor?
Krzysztof
On 21/07/2011 4:59 PM, Rory Plaire wrote:
2011/7/20 Krzysztof Koźmic <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
of course it doesn't. There's no implementation to proceed to
Indeed, of course... but this also precludes chaining subsequent
interceptors. However, doesn't the ExtendedHandler take care of
not needing an actual instance to proceed to?
--
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]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
<mailto:[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]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
<mailto: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.
--
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.
