ok, but that's the other way around from what the initial question was about
:)

Feel free to log it in uservoice for Windsor.

2010/10/27 José F. Romaniello <[email protected]>

> I did something backwards..some time ago , a component that just can
> be resolved but not inyected in other component. I was going to use
> that within a viewmodels scenario but then i figure out a better way.
> You can google for noninyectablefacility
>
>
>
> 2010/10/26, IanT8 <[email protected]>:
> > Does windsor support the notion of public and private components? For
> > example, if Component A depends on Component B and both are registered
> > on the container, client code can directly resolve an instance of
> > Component A but not Component B. Component B would essentially be
> > invisible to client code, part of the inner workings of A only.
> >
> > --
> > 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]<castle-project-users%[email protected]>
> .
> > For more options, visit this group at
> > http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en.
> >
> >
>
> --
> Enviado desde mi dispositivo móvil
>
> --
> 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]<castle-project-users%[email protected]>
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
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.

Reply via email to