Hi Krzysztof

I see. I would have thought that the original owner of the factory
would always be the scope of the resolved components, no matter in
what context the factory was used. It seems like a nice default to me,
but I guess I overlook some subtleties :)

For what it's worth, I can say that it would be very useful for my
current scenario of a batch processor of messages. I get a bunch of
messages, use the factory to resolve message handlers for each one,
and I want to have injected the same database session into each in the
scope of the batch processor.

Any advice on how this can be done otherwise?

Thanks,
Asger

On Dec 22, 9:56 pm, Krzysztof Koźmic <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Hi Asger,
>
> It doesn't work for typed factories. Since a factory can be passed
> around and used in different contexts there's ambiguity as to the scope
> of components you'd be resolving via the factory.
>
> K
>
> On 23/12/2011 6:29 AM, Asger Hallas wrote:
>
> 112113
>
> 114
>
>
>
> > Hi
>
> > I might have misunderstood the purpose or overlooked some limitations
> > of the new BoundTo lifestyle, but isn't this supposed to work?
>
> >      public class windsor_boundto_scoping
> >      {
> >          [Fact]
> >          public void can_scope_late_bound()
> >          {
> >              var c = new WindsorContainer()
> >                  .AddFacility<TypedFactoryFacility>()
> >                  .Register(Component.For<Parent>().LifeStyle.Transient,
>
> > Component.For<Child>().LifeStyle.BoundTo<Parent>());
>
> >              c.Resolve<Parent>().AndThen();
> >          }
>
> >          public class Parent
> >          {
> >              readonly Func<Child>  late;
>
> >              public Parent(Func<Child>  late)
> >              {
> >                  this.late = late;
> >              }
>
> >              public void AndThen()
> >              {
> >                  late();
> >              }
> >          }
>
> >          public class Child
> >          {
> >          }
> >      }
>
> > The docs says: "Bound lifestyle - allows objects to be reused within
> > dependency subtree"
>
> > Is a typed factory not part of the dependency subtree of its owner?
>
> > //Asger

-- 
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.

Reply via email to