Hi Ben,

Thanks! I knew what the two meant... :)

When I first heard someone trying to explain IoC it made no sense, until they used the term Dependency Injection.

Made much more sense like that. Was just wondering if any one else also experienced it like that?

Just wondering if we as Java people aren't trying to invent some really cool buzzwords to make us sound more aloof? :)

Cheers,
Renier

Ben van der Merwe wrote:
Hi Renier,

Inversion of Control is a design principle or characteristic that frameworks try to achieve (term first coined by Martin Fowler). Dependency Injection is a specific design pattern that realizes the characteristic as its intent. So it only makes sense to refer to Dependency Injection frameworks, because we are referring to a specific pattern implementation, not the general principle or characteristic.

In the .Net world Microsoft has a ObjectBuilder component in their Enterprise Library and they consistently refer to it as an implementation of the Dependency Injection pattern, so there is industry-wide trend towards this more specific term, where applicable.

Here is Fowler's article that discusses this issue:
http://www.martinfowler.com/articles/injection.html


Cheers,
Ben

Renier Rhode wrote:
Who actually gets Inversion of Control? The term makes no sense to me... It's other name ( Dependency Injection ) makes much more sense... ( to me in any case )

Cheers,
Renier

Paul wrote:
Hello

I'm interested to know which MVC & IoC frameworks you guys use... I'd
like to know how many of you use which frameworks.

We currently us Spring (IoC & MVC) 1.2.6 (soon to migrate to 2.x)

Regards
Paul



  




-- 
Ben van der Merwe
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  



--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CTJUG Forum" 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/CTJUG-Forum
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to