A far I know Ninject don't have owned DynamicProxy generator. If I well remember Ninject allow you to choose one (LinFu or Castle).About default ProxyFactoryFactory (that is another "thing" than ProxyFactory) NH don't have a default. As the "dialect" is better if the user know what he want use. More infos are available here: http://nhforge.org/blogs/nhibernate/archive/2008/11/09/nh2-1-0-bytecode-providers.aspx
2008/11/12 Ramana-Sowmya Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Hi Fabio > I agree that the ability to switch ProxyFactory is is a good thing. If I > am already using NInject, I would probably switch from castle to Ninject. I > still think that NHibernate should have a default and ship with that. Most > NHusers don't use IOC/DI anyway and could care less which one is used in > NH. NH should use a one "default" (be it LinFu, Castle whatever). > Optionally, one could override the default and use other ProxyGenerator or > build your own. > Thanks > Ramana > > > On 11/11/08, Fabio Maulo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> I like modeling using interfaces for entities too. If you know what is >> ProxyFactory you know that mean write the base class for all proxies in NH. >> An example of ProxyFactory implementation is available in one of the tests >> of NHibernate.ByteCode.Castle. >> That tests show how, who want write his ProxyFactory must know >> the underlining "Proxy generator" and who are writing proxies implementation >> using Spring or LinFu must have a choice to write his proxyFactory using >> what he want. >> >> >> I don't understand you disappoint. >> NH are leaving the user to choose RDBMS, ByteCode-provider, Transaction >> Factory, ConnectionProvider and so on... the DynProxy system is only one >> more "no-intrusion" of NH. >> >> >> If you have a "strong opinion" about why NH must have an hard reference to >> Castle.DynamicProxy I'm open to hear it. >> >> >> 2008/11/11 hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 4:33 AM, Fabio Maulo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> wrote: >>> > Probably; both are fruit. >>> > Who are using IoC, probably, are using AOP of the same FW; who are >>> using AOP >>> > are using DynProxy. >>> > Now, who want can use the same DynProxy in NH (for example to inject >>> the >>> > ProxyFactory) >>> > Some weeks ago Oren begin a branch to use NH with PostSharp; a complete >>> > separation from the DynProxy is needed. >>> > BTW to have more than one choice is a good thing; for that i'm using >>> IoC. >>> > Thanks to leave here your opinion. >>> >>> >>> Not sure I follow. I might be using Spring or Windsor, they wont >>> interfere on how NH handles proxies. AOP will be limited to my >>> services, not domain classes. >>> The choice of what I'd like NH to use to create proxies (be it DP, >>> PostSharp or whatever) is orthogonal to my choice of framework stack. >>> >>> Anyway, I was just curious on the rationale - which seems broken. No >>> strong opinions. >>> >>> -- >>> Cheers, >>> hammett >>> http://hammett.castleproject.org/ >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Fabio Maulo >> >> > > -- Fabio Maulo
