Thanks for your reply you two. I have done a quick code review already on both methods of "surfacing" the Configuration. In both cases it appears that they require a call to FluentConfiguration.BuildSessionFactory to have any effect. It is only by calling BuildSessionFactory that the underlying Configuration object gets to be configured.
I don't want to make a call to BuildSessionFactory just to get back a Configuration object that I can use. BuildSessionFactory actually creates the SessionFactory which I don't want FNH to do. Am I missing something here? Thanks Christian On Mar 2, 2:44 pm, Tuna Toksoz <[email protected]> wrote: > var cfg = new Configuration(); > > Fluently.Configure(cfg) > .blah(); > > or this one > > Tuna > Toksözhttp://tunatoksoz.comhttp://turkiyealt.nethttp://twitter.com/tehlike > > Typos included to enhance the readers attention! > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 4:43 PM, James Gregory <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > You can pass a Configuration instance into Configure, or you can use > > ExposeConfiguration. > > > On 3/2/09, christianacca <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I am trying to integrate FNH with the Session management functionality > > > implemented in the uNhAddins project. > > > > It seems like I cannot "get at" the NH Configuration object without > > > building the NH SessionFactory. Please correct me if that is not the > > > case. > > > > Assuming I am correct, I would like to arrange responsibilities such > > > that: > > > 1) FNH is responsible for building up the NH Configuration object > > > 2) the session management classes in uNhAddins create the > > > ISessionFactory > > > > This would seem to be a good split of reponsibilities. > > > > To do this however, I need FNH to split out the responsibility of > > > building up the Configuration object from the existing > > > FluentConfiguration.BuildSessionFactory method. And to then "surface" > > > the Configuration object without having to call > > > FluentConfiguration.BuildSessionFactory. > > > > Thinking of possible solutions to how to "surface" the Configuration > > > object, either: > > > 1) create a method named PeekConfiguration that returns a configured > > > Configuration object directly > > > 2) define an implicit converstion operator that would "cast" an > > > instance of FluentConfiguration to an instance of Configuration. > > > > The second solution seems to be more in keeping with the "Fluent" > > > interface. > > > > What's your thoughts? > > > > I am happy to supply a patch for this. > > > > Thanks > > > Christian --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Fluent NHibernate" 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/fluent-nhibernate?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
