+1
I always forget there is a forum.
mausch wrote:
It seems that nobody checks http://forum.castleproject.org anymore...
for some reason Henry stopped answering on 6/11...
I see a lot of unanswered questions over there. Also many people cross-
post here.
So, why not make it readonly and put
Short answer: it doesn't exist, you probably don't need it; Windsor has
a smarter algorithm than most containers.
Long answer:
You could provide this functionality by registering an inherited class
instead of the base class. For example if you had:
public class MyService:IService {
public
I don't know if anybody else has hit on this but it seems to me like
some documentation somewhere needs to be made better...
I was trying to use this interceptor I wrote [1] in a testing website we
are building. The interceptor is used on a half dozen types and we
needed to know what service
I have the following class that I am using and I was wondering if I have
a good mapping for it or if I can do better...
[Serializable]
[ActiveRecord(Table = UserProvidedPropertyContainers)]
public class UserProvidedPropertyContainer :
ActiveRecordBaseUserProvidedPropertyContainer {
Danyal Aytekin wrote:
Do you need to have both? You could have the first and then to access
the ID you could use Report.ReportID (or whatever the ID is called
in the Report table).
If Report is loaded lazily, you would have to do another database lookup
to get to it. This would be not
I would imagine that spark performance is very dependent on how you are
using it.
I mean, there is pre-compiled views, JIT views and even client side views.
Terry Massey wrote:
All,
Has any one done a Performance comparison on the view engines?
I have been using NVelocity, and I am very
StringClob should really map to NTEXT, not nvarchar(max) (although I am
not sure what the difference is post sql 2005)
Krzysztof Koźmic wrote:
I don't know about AR, but in bare NH you can set sql-type to
varchar(max) (see here:
I would do this in a similar manner to how lazy loading is done within NH...
That is, create a proxy class generator (perhaps use the one already in
NH?) which would be used by a Windsor facility to provide the
implementation of the service you need. Then within the generated proxy
you would
Isn't this what MEF was made for?
Anyways what we do:
[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Assembly, Inherited = false,
AllowMultiple = false)]
public sealed class ComponentRegistrarAttribute : Attribute {
private readonly Type _componentRegistrarClass;
public
Sometimes the container should throw a better exception when you try to
resolve something that isn't in it.
If you try to resolve a type but it isn't registered, but the type
implements an interface or is derived from a type that is registered,
the exception should say so.
Something like:
I do this (actual code from my site, changed redirect string):
Default.aspx
--
%@ Page Language=vb %
!DOCTYPE html
html
head runat=server
titleDefault/title
script type=text/VB runat=server
Public Sub Page_PreInit(ByVal sender As Object, ByVal e As EventArgs)
.
Symon Rottem
http://blog.symbiotic-development.com
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Bill Barry
after.fall...@gmail.com mailto:after.fall...@gmail.com wrote:
I do this (actual code from my site, changed redirect string):
Default.aspx
say I have the following types
public interface ISometypeT {}
public class SomeTypeImplT:ISometypeT {}
public class SomeSpecificTypeImplT:ISometypeT where T:
ISomeSpecificSpecifier {}
public interface ISomeSpecificSpecifier { }
Is there a way to register ISomeType in the
I don't know how I forgot about that (I do remember your post about it),
but it removed the need for two other facilities I was using, simplified
my container infrastructure codebase considerably and probably increased
performance (no numbers available, but the facilities were overriding
the
IIRC there was a chicken-egg problem there that was simply decided to be
ignored in the first place.
For those who know what they are doing there isn't really an issue but
if this was implemented and then started getting wide use we would run
into complaints that the container is missing
I cannot believe we aren't doing this elsewhere in our application yet,
but since I cannot find a pattern elsewhere in use and am having trouble
figuring out at the moment what to search for online I figured I'd ask:
I am currently dealing with an issue where I need to update several
elements
1. Should I pretend the future changes do not exist and simply map the
stuff I need right now, knowing I will need to write something that can
migrate the data later, or should I create the ContentArea DO now and
just expand on it later and not have to do a migration at all (leaning
this way)?
Konstantin wrote:
up
Is there an issue the tracker for this?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Castle
Project Users group.
To post to this group, send email to castle-project-us...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
Stefan Sedich wrote:
interface IRepositoryTKey, TEntity { }
interface ICustomerRepository : IRepositoryGuid, Customer { }
class CustomerRepository : ICustomerRepository { }
container.Register(
AllTypes.FromAssembly(Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly())
Doesn't this work:
.Where(item=item.IsInterface typeof(T).IsAssignableFrom(item))
IE:
public static class Extensions {
public static BasedOnDescriptor
BasedOnInterfaceInheritingT(this FromAssemblyDescriptor assembly) {
return assembly.Where(item = item.IsInterface
I have the following class CustomForm. I was wondering if it is possible
to query for custom forms which have a particular value in a particular
key in their dictionary.
[Serializable]
[ActiveRecord]
public class CustomForm : ActiveRecordBaseCustomForm {
IDictionarystring,
21 matches
Mail list logo
