Thanks Craig, you've got it bang on in one, and cheers Ayende, a custom Lifecycle would be just what Im looking for to work in unison with the lazy loading mechanism.
Adam Langley Senior Developer www.winscribe.com Please consider the environment before printing this email! From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Craig Neuwirt Sent: Wednesday, 12 August 2009 3:18 a.m. To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Design questions for resolution of IOC-ISSUE-161 The original feature request for the WCF Facility was to not require registering a client component for a WCF interface that is already defined in the app.config/web.config via the system.serviceModel section. This makes it nice and DRY to not have to indicate that you want a WCF Facility managed proxy in two different places (web.config and castle config). All the WCF Facility would do is hook into the lazy handler mechanism and determine if the requested services is defined in the current configuration file. If it is, it will automatically register the corresponding component in the container using the existing WCF Configuration. This seems to be the same scenario that MEF would use this hook for? 2009/8/11 Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> In that case, I don't understand it, do read the app.config to integrate with that? 2009/8/11 Craig Neuwirt <[email protected]> Hey guys, Just returned from a quick vacation. I don't think WCF presents any different scenario than MEF or any lazy discovery. WCF Facility would take advantage of the same deferred resolution hook to provide WCF managed proxies that were only defined in the standard system.serviceModel configuration. 2009/8/11 Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> Okay, We have two distinct requests here. One is for WCF stuff, and as presented, it looks like life styles can resolve that. Second is for additional providers for handlers, for things like MEF, lazy component discovery, etc. Is this accruate? 2009/8/11 Krzysztof Koźmic <[email protected]> Agreed. (inline) > > Argh, NO! No, letting lazy handler provider, or whatever we call it decide whether it wants to register the handler in the container or not, should let you cover probably all the scenarios. I say let's have _a_ way of implementing that, then we'll spike its usage in WCF Facility (and if I find some time, I plan to do also MEF integration that would require this as well) and see how that works, and what did we miss. Ay? > > If this is what you want, all you need to do is to write a custom life > cycle. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
