so just ask HttpContext.Current.WHADEVER On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 1:37 PM, Henning <[email protected]>wrote:
> > Ahh - I just figured, the IEngineContext is part of MonoRail, but I'm > not using MonoRail. I just use the IoC capabilities of castle windsor, > since my app is going to run inside of MOSS :) So I suppose I cannot > use the approache you described - at least not in this way. > > On 5 Mrz., 10:47, Ken Egozi <[email protected]> wrote: > > what about adding the resolver itself to the container, and add a > dependency > > on IEngineContext, and setting the FactoryFacility to inject the current > > context when asked for. > > then your resolver can look at context.Request[WHATEVER] and resolev the > > correct service > > > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Henning <[email protected] > >wrote: > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > > > OK, so I quickly wrote a little Resolver (hey - I'm impressed, this > > > was actually much easier than I first thought! Thanx to Tuna and > > >http://tunatoksoz.com/post/Castle-ServiceIdResolver.aspx). > > > > > So my current setup is, that I have a singleton instance of the > > > container globally available in my app. In the ctor of the singleton I > > > do all the configuration, like registering components. I already > > > figured, that I have to first register the Resolver before registering > > > any components. But at this point in time I don't know the actual > > > values I want to supply via the resolver. > > > > > So I need to access the resolver a little bit later in my app and set > > > some properties - obviously before resolving any components via > > > castle. But how do I get a handle of the resolver-instance? > > > > > On 4 Mrz., 23:39, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Yep, you need a resolver for this.check ISubDependencyResolver for > the > > > > details. > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Henning < > [email protected] > > > >wrote: > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > hmm OK - and how ould I do something like that? > > > > > > > I assume I have to write my own resolver, which can inject this > > > > > parameter to my component? If I'm adding such a resolver to my > > > > > container, I still will have to tell the resolve the actual value > to > > > > > inject. > > > > > > > I didn't mention it, because I don't know if it does matter - this > is > > > > > a web-based app, and the "itemId" depends on the request being > served > > > > > - so the container is most likely only once initialized and then > never > > > > > again :) > > > > > > > On 4 Mrz., 23:28, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > if you have just global stuff, you can use a sub resolver to > handle > > > that > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 1:57 PM, Henning < > > > [email protected] > > > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > I have an interesting problem. I have a whole bunch of > components, > > > > > > > which are registered in my castle container. I mass-registered > them > > > > > > > either based on a certain naming convention or on a common > base- > > > > > > > interface they implement. This allows me to register all my > > > components > > > > > > > with just two lines of code (kinda) using the fluent API. > > > > > > > > > So next I build my app using all those nice available > components. > > > So > > > > > > > each components specifies their needs as > constructor-parameters. So > > > > > > > now I'm accessing only a handful of components directly in my > app, > > > > > > > everything else is magically handled by castle. > > > > > > > > > OK, so now comes the catch. I have a component > > > ConfigurationContext, > > > > > > > which needs an itemId parameter. This needs to be supplied by > the > > > app, > > > > > > > but the component is not resolved by the app, but by the > > > dependencies > > > > > > > of other components. > > > > > > > > > So I would like to go ahead an tell castle "hey, is anyone > needs > > > the > > > > > > > itemId; it's 42!". > > > > > > > > > I though this must be achievable by using properties. I > remembered > > > > > > > back when working with windsor.config.xml I could pass > parameters > > > to a > > > > > > > component while referencing a property. This was also specified > in > > > the > > > > > > > config-file, but hey, couldn't that be done via code as well? > So > > > this > > > > > > > is the real question: how would I do something like that? So > how > > > could > > > > > > > I tell the castle container that the value of a property called > > > > > > > "itemId" is 42? > > > > > > > > > And by the way: since I mass-registered all my components I > would > > > need > > > > > > > to adjust the ConfigurationContext component, so that castle > know > > > to > > > > > > > pull the "itemId" property as a paramter for this component. If > I > > > > > > > would register this component individually I would do something > > > like: > > > > > > > > > Container.Register(Component.For<IConfigurationContext> > > > > > ().ImplementedBy<ConfigurationContext>().Parameters(Parameter.ForKey > > > > > > > ("ItemId").Eq("{itemId}"))); > > > > > > > > > So is there any way to "modify" an existing > > > component-registration?- > > > > > Zitierten Text ausblenden - > > > > > > > > - Zitierten Text anzeigen - > > > > -- > > Ken Egozi. > http://www.kenegozi.com/bloghttp://www.delver.comhttp://www.musicglue.comhttp://www.castleproject.orghttp://www.gotfriends.co.il > > > -- Ken Egozi. http://www.kenegozi.com/blog http://www.delver.com http://www.musicglue.com http://www.castleproject.org http://www.gotfriends.co.il --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Castle Project Users" 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-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
