ok, i made it work by rebuilding the latest build. now i will try the idea you gave. i will keep you updated on the results.
thx for now mate On Aug 29, 4:30 pm, Krzysztof Koźmic <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm not sure if it's updated already, check the > version:http://builds.castleproject.org/viewLog.html?buildId=7085&buildTypeId... > > On 29/08/2010 11:27 PM, barroei wrote: > > > > > oh, ok, that is one i missed :-) > > > tell me is there a built on WCFIntegration.Dll that support 2.5 > > version > > cause if i remove the MicroKernel Dll it says that : > > > The type 'Castle.MicroKernel.Facilities.AbstractFacility' is defined > > in an assembly that is not referenced. You must add a reference to > > assembly 'Castle.MicroKernel, Version=1.0.3.0, Culture=neutral, > > PublicKeyToken=407dd0808d44fbdc'. > > > On Aug 29, 4:17 pm, Krzysztof Koźmic<[email protected]> > > wrote: > >> Yes but it won't be dynamic. It has to implement interfaces it > >> exposes, and a type can't gain an interface dynamically. > > >> On 29/08/2010 11:08 PM, barroei wrote: > > >>> i can have the implementaion class also as a container class > >>> On Aug 29, 4:00 pm, Krzysztof Koźmic<[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>>> I forgot to add you need version 2.5 to get that Mixin syntax. > >>>> Yes you can have one implementation that forwards to other > >>>> implementation but I thought you mentioned you wanted this to be > >>>> dynamic... > >>>> On 29/08/2010 10:58 PM, barroei wrote: > >>>>> i cant get the damn syntax for the MixIn, > >>>>> i had in mind another idea, to have a single Implenetation Class, that > >>>>> has dependencies to all > >>>>> other Implementation classes. > >>>>> that should be easier to implement wont you think? > >>>>> On Aug 29, 3:48 pm, Krzysztof Koźmic<[email protected]> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> How else would you want to do it than via dynamic proxy? Again - > >>>>>> container aside. > >>>>>> On 29/08/2010 10:47 PM, barroei wrote: > >>>>>>> I didnt try the proxy option yet. > >>>>>>> but will it work with more then 2 interfaces? > >>>>>>> On Aug 29, 3:40 pm, Krzysztof Koźmic<[email protected]> > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> Well what I think might work, is registering all the pieces > >>>>>>>> separately > >>>>>>>> and then picking one of them as the host and mixing in all the > >>>>>>>> remaining > >>>>>>>> ones. > >>>>>>>> container.Register( > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Component.For<IFirst>().ImplementedBy<First>().Proxy.MixIns(m => > >>>>>>>> m.Service<ISecond>()), > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Component.For<ISecond>().ImplementedBy<Second>()); > >>>>>>>> This is the idea, but I'm not sure how DynamicProxy will handle all > >>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>> WCF attributes. > >>>>>>>> On 29/08/2010 10:34 PM, barroei wrote: > >>>>>>>>> yep, > >>>>>>>>> you got exactly the idea :-) > >>>>>>>>> the thing is building it is abit complex since i cant get the howto > >>>>>>>>> build the damn thing. > >>>>>>>>> this is the first IOC that seems todo so, very close to what > >>>>>>>>> Spring .NET does. > >>>>>>>>> but still, there is something missing, and i cant get the damn thing > >>>>>>>>> to work. > >>>>>>>>> i have tried multiple overrides to try to use the current > >>>>>>>>> registration > >>>>>>>>> model, but it just doesnt add up. > >>>>>>>>> i can download the sources and try to fix it, but i think i am > >>>>>>>>> missing > >>>>>>>>> something > >>>>>>>>> and it can be done in the current registration model. > >>>>>>>>> i just cant figure out the how... > >>>>>>>>> On Aug 29, 3:04 pm, Krzysztof Koźmic<[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> ah I think I vaguely begin to see what you're trying to do > >>>>>>>>>> so you want an umbrella object that would implement multiple > >>>>>>>>>> interfaces > >>>>>>>>>> and contain multiple other obects that each implement one of these > >>>>>>>>>> interfaces and then route calls to each interface to its respective > >>>>>>>>>> implementation object and on top of that expose everything as WCF > >>>>>>>>>> service? > >>>>>>>>>> On 29/08/2010 9:52 PM, barroei wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> do u have google talk ? or msn? it will be much easier... > >>>>>>>>>>> the general idea is to make a dynamic multi endpoint WCF service > >>>>>>>>>>> over > >>>>>>>>>>> IIS > >>>>>>>>>>> meaning i want the service to be able to load Interface dynamicly > >>>>>>>>>>> as i > >>>>>>>>>>> am doing if i set a single Interface. > >>>>>>>>>>> but i would also like to make it so that the Interface and > >>>>>>>>>>> Implementation are built by differant users > >>>>>>>>>>> meaning that every user that will built an Interface will also > >>>>>>>>>>> build > >>>>>>>>>>> his very own Implementation. > >>>>>>>>>>> and via configuration i will have the service register them. > >>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 29, 2:48 pm, Krzysztof Koźmic<[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> Can we step back a little? > >>>>>>>>>>>> What are you trying to do? Container aside. > >>>>>>>>>>>> On 29/08/2010 9:41 PM, barroei wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> why doesnt it make sense? > >>>>>>>>>>>>> i want to make the entire service generic. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> add Interfaces dynamicaly and add the Implementation class that > >>>>>>>>>>>>> is > >>>>>>>>>>>>> attached to it. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> without touching the once that are already registered. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> there must be an option to do it. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> is there an option to tell the Implementation class to implement > >>>>>>>>>>>>> another interface ? > >>>>>>>>>>>>> and load the interface implementation as a dependency class? > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 29, 2:19 pm, Krzysztof Koźmic<[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> This doesn't make any sense. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sent from my HTC Desire > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 29/08/2010 9:16 PM, "barroei"<[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> i cant use different names. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> its the same service. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> i want it to have multiple interfaces. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> meaning multiple servicecontracts on the same service. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> i can easily do it if implement all interfaces by the same > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> class. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> but i want it to be generic and have an implementation class > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> per each > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> interface > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 29, 10:05 am, Ayende Rahien<[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You need different names > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 9:49 AM, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> barroei<[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hello. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i am tr... > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]<castle-project-users%2bun[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <castle-project-users%2bun[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> . > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For more options, visit this group at > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en.-Hidequoted > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> text - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Google Groups > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Castle Project Users" gro...- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > >>>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- 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.
