i can have the implementaion class also as a container class On Aug 29, 4:00 pm, Krzysztof Koźmic <[email protected]> wrote: > I forgot to add you need version 2.5 to get that Mixin syntax. > > Yes you can have one implementation that forwards to other > implementation but I thought you mentioned you wanted this to be dynamic... > > On 29/08/2010 10:58 PM, barroei wrote: > > > > > i cant get the damn syntax for the MixIn, > > > i had in mind another idea, to have a single Implenetation Class, that > > has dependencies to all > > other Implementation classes. > > > that should be easier to implement wont you think? > > > On Aug 29, 3:48 pm, Krzysztof Koźmic<[email protected]> > > wrote: > >> How else would you want to do it than via dynamic proxy? Again - > >> container aside. > > >> On 29/08/2010 10:47 PM, barroei wrote: > > >>> I didnt try the proxy option yet. > >>> but will it work with more then 2 interfaces? > >>> On Aug 29, 3:40 pm, Krzysztof Koźmic<[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>>> Well what I think might work, is registering all the pieces > >>>> separately > >>>> and then picking one of them as the host and mixing in all the remaining > >>>> ones. > >>>> container.Register( > >>>> > >>>> Component.For<IFirst>().ImplementedBy<First>().Proxy.MixIns(m => > >>>> m.Service<ISecond>()), > >>>> Component.For<ISecond>().ImplementedBy<Second>()); > >>>> This is the idea, but I'm not sure how DynamicProxy will handle all the > >>>> WCF attributes. > >>>> On 29/08/2010 10:34 PM, barroei wrote: > >>>>> yep, > >>>>> you got exactly the idea :-) > >>>>> the thing is building it is abit complex since i cant get the howto > >>>>> build the damn thing. > >>>>> this is the first IOC that seems todo so, very close to what > >>>>> Spring .NET does. > >>>>> but still, there is something missing, and i cant get the damn thing > >>>>> to work. > >>>>> i have tried multiple overrides to try to use the current registration > >>>>> model, but it just doesnt add up. > >>>>> i can download the sources and try to fix it, but i think i am missing > >>>>> something > >>>>> and it can be done in the current registration model. > >>>>> i just cant figure out the how... > >>>>> On Aug 29, 3:04 pm, Krzysztof Koźmic<[email protected]> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> ah I think I vaguely begin to see what you're trying to do > >>>>>> so you want an umbrella object that would implement multiple interfaces > >>>>>> and contain multiple other obects that each implement one of these > >>>>>> interfaces and then route calls to each interface to its respective > >>>>>> implementation object and on top of that expose everything as WCF > >>>>>> service? > >>>>>> On 29/08/2010 9:52 PM, barroei wrote: > >>>>>>> do u have google talk ? or msn? it will be much easier... > >>>>>>> the general idea is to make a dynamic multi endpoint WCF service over > >>>>>>> IIS > >>>>>>> meaning i want the service to be able to load Interface dynamicly as i > >>>>>>> am doing if i set a single Interface. > >>>>>>> but i would also like to make it so that the Interface and > >>>>>>> Implementation are built by differant users > >>>>>>> meaning that every user that will built an Interface will also build > >>>>>>> his very own Implementation. > >>>>>>> and via configuration i will have the service register them. > >>>>>>> On Aug 29, 2:48 pm, Krzysztof Koźmic<[email protected]> > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> Can we step back a little? > >>>>>>>> What are you trying to do? Container aside. > >>>>>>>> On 29/08/2010 9:41 PM, barroei wrote: > >>>>>>>>> why doesnt it make sense? > >>>>>>>>> i want to make the entire service generic. > >>>>>>>>> add Interfaces dynamicaly and add the Implementation class that is > >>>>>>>>> attached to it. > >>>>>>>>> without touching the once that are already registered. > >>>>>>>>> there must be an option to do it. > >>>>>>>>> is there an option to tell the Implementation class to implement > >>>>>>>>> another interface ? > >>>>>>>>> and load the interface implementation as a dependency class? > >>>>>>>>> On Aug 29, 2:19 pm, Krzysztof Koźmic<[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> This doesn't make any sense. > >>>>>>>>>> sent from my HTC Desire > >>>>>>>>>> On 29/08/2010 9:16 PM, "barroei"<[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> i cant use different names. > >>>>>>>>>> its the same service. > >>>>>>>>>> i want it to have multiple interfaces. > >>>>>>>>>> meaning multiple servicecontracts on the same service. > >>>>>>>>>> i can easily do it if implement all interfaces by the same class. > >>>>>>>>>> but i want it to be generic and have an implementation class per > >>>>>>>>>> each > >>>>>>>>>> interface > >>>>>>>>>> On Aug 29, 10:05 am, Ayende Rahien<[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> You need different names > >>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 9:49 AM, barroei<[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> hello. > >>>>>>>>>>>> i am tr... > >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]<castle-project-users%2bun[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>> <castle-project-users%2bun[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>>> . > >>>>>>>>>>>> For more options, visit this group at > >>>>>>>>>>>>http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en.-Hidequoted > >>>>>>>>>> text - > >>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > >>>>>>>>>> Groups > >>>>>>>>>> "Castle Project Users" gro...- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > >>>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
-- 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.
