Imho, the devel list is the right place for a discussion like these. I'll be more difficult to follow the discussion having to reach the page from time to time.
On 9 maio, 04:59, Krzysztof Koźmic <[email protected]> wrote: > Thiago, > > This is quite interesting indeed and I admire your determination on this > one. > Actually I would really want to turn DynamicProxy into more extensible > type generation framework to allow for few scenarios we want to support > internally in Castle. > > 1. async calls on sync contract in Silverlight version of WCF > Facility (hey Frederic:) ). We do it differently in full .NET > version of the facility (by extending the type system), but since > the API is not there in Silverlight, our only option would be to > generate a totally new type that has no inheritance relation to > the "blueprint" type and only uses it to obtain some information > about its own shape. So this is certainly not usual DynamicProxy > job :) > 2. in v2.5 we want to merge DictionaryAdapter into Castle.Core.dll, > and for future version since both DP and DA use runtime type > generation I'd like to bring them closer together and make as much > of core, low level stuff between them as makes sense > > Current version (v2.2, but there aren't many changes in upcomming v2.5 > in this area) is a point in the middle between old monolithic > architecture and something more modular. > ITypeContributors were my attempt at introducing this modularity at > member level. I'm still not quite happy about how it played out (the > mixins hack) but it's step in the right direction I think. > > All in all, if you'd like to exchange some ideas about it I'd be happy > to. Let's use Wiki for this not to pollute the discussion group. I guess > Craig and Frederic (and whoever else is interested) should join the > discussion as > well.http://stw.castleproject.org/Tools.DynamicProxy-Roadmap.ashx?Discuss=... > > On 2010-05-09 01:59, Thiago de Arruda wrote: > > >http://www.codeproject.com/KB/dotnet/extensibledynproxy.aspx > > > This is the better I could do on extending the proxies. Tell me your > > opinions. > > -- > 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 > athttp://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en. -- 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.
