Meh.
So that you can return more than two values. General prefer Enum to Bool
thoughts.

-d

2011/2/3 Krzysztof Koźmic <[email protected]>

>  Wny an enum?
>
> Notice that would be a breaking change in both behavior and API. -
> AddFacility currently returns back the container so that it can be used in a
> method chain
>
>
> On 04/02/2011 5:28 AM, Dru Sellers wrote:
>
> I would love this:
>
> - Make AddFacility method behave like Add in HashSet, that is return true
> and do add the facility if it's not there yet, or ignore the call, don't
> throw and return false
>
> Instead of bool it could be an Enum? Either way though I would be happy.
>
> -d
>
>
> 2011/1/31 Krzysztof Koźmic <[email protected]>
>
>>  I have already made a change in the trunk some time ago that throws
>> immediately if you've added the same facility twice with more descriptive
>> message.
>> Having said that - I do understand the scenario Dru is facing, and
>> actually we have  a (minor) dependency on TFF in WCF Facility too, although
>> we don't register it there.
>> So other than just leaving it as is, I have two proposed solutions for
>> that:
>>
>> - Make AddFacility method behave like Add in HashSet, that is return true
>> and do add the facility if it's not there yet, or ignore the call, don't
>> throw and return false
>> - Make TypedFactoryFacility available OOTB in the container, that is
>> pre-register it.
>> - Mix the above approaches, so that we don't break existing clients -
>> their calls to AddFacility<TFF> will just be ignored and everything will
>> work
>> - Anything else?
>>
>>
>> HTH,
>>  Krzysztof
>>
>>
>> On 01/02/2011 6:59 AM, Dru Sellers wrote:
>>
>> If you look at my first post I am already using GetFacilities() and it is
>> working just fine.
>>
>> 2 different 3rd party facilities? At this point not many projects outside
>> of castle actually ship with Windsor Facilities, so I am not to worried
>> about that.
>>
>> I was really just looking for a shortcut method. :)
>>
>> -d
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Jason Meckley <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not familiar with getfacilities(). that may be another option. I
>>> don't like adding facilities from within one another, for the scenario you
>>> are currently facing. what if 2 different 3rd party facilities add the typed
>>> factory facility? you could resolve the scenario you are facing.
>>>
>>> to keep the facility frictionless you could reverse the "add facility"
>>> logic I proposed above. have a configuration option to not add the facility.
>>> this would be used in advanced/custom configuration scenarios.
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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.
>>
>>
>>    --
>> 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.
>
>
>  --
> 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