Well that's the thing. I'm not sure it's reasonable. If you want to
provide prices you'd expose that via a method, not on the type itself.
And that's the reason for this change in the first place - value type or
collection of value type as a service is not a real service and it
should never have been supported.
Since v3.1 is a minor update I guess I'm willing to revert that behavior
and keep it the old way in this case, while postponing the change to the
next major version.
But in the long run, clearly you're registering a service that is not
meant to be a service, and is probably never used as such anyway.
What do other folks think of that?
@K
bling wrote:
IMO, i think the whole point of having scanning is to avoid being
explicit. if i need to use WithService.Select, which is not much more
useful then registering everything explicitly, to get around the new
semantics of WithAllInterfaces, then its usefulness has decreased
substantially.
aside, if a user wants to register IEnumerable<ValueType> into
Windsor, which worked before (and presumably every version prior to
3.1), why was it changed to not support it? it's easy to come up with
a reasonable use case, like a service which provides real time stock
prices in the form of value types, exposed as IEnumerable<StockPrice>.
thx,
bling
On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 10:11:47 PM UTC-4, Krzysztof Koźmic wrote:
I'm not sure I want to ignore anything. If a user wants to
register something they should either get it registered or should
be notified it's not supported.
After giving it some more thoughts I'm thinking perhaps we should
leave the current behavior. If having IEnumerable<Something> is
not your intention be explicit about it and do not include it.
The idea with "system interfaces" is more complicated than it
seems. In reality all Microsoft interfaces are in System.something
namespace so having a blanket arbitrary rule to filter them out
built into Windsor doesn't look like such a good idea after all.
I think the solution I would advise and the one I'm leaning
towards most is to leave the behavior and API exactly as it is
now, and just recommend people to use WithiService.Select(be
specific here) instead.
@K
bling wrote:
correction: "...since i would *not* expect that to throw..."
On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 9:42:25 AM UTC-4, bling wrote:
that would work.
however, i'm more questioning in the intent of the scanning
registration API, since i would expect that to throw any kind of
exception. worst case should be that you don't have something
registered. if that can still be the case, then you can simply
ignore IEnumerable<ValueType> instead of throwing.
if that won't fly, you could also do a
WithServiceAllInterfaces(bool excludeSystemInterfaces = true)
thx!
p.s. i've logged the bug at
http://issues.castleproject.org/issue/IOC-347
<http://issues.castleproject.org/issue/IOC-347>
<http://issues.castleproject.org/issue/IOC-347
<http://issues.castleproject.org/issue/IOC-347>>, although if you
add a new WithService* then it'd be more of a feature request.
On Tuesday, July 10, 2012 6:09:48 PM UTC-4, bling wrote:
the following works with 3.0, but throws an exception in 3.1
var c = new WindsorContainer();
c.Register(Classes.From(typeof(Dictionary<,>)).Pick().WithServiceBase().WithServiceAllInterfaces());
i'm not sure what the actual issue is, but exception message
complained about ICollection<KeyValuePair<,>> so i took a
guess and was able to reproduce. a class similar to that
signature does exist in my actual code.
thanks,
bling
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Castle Project Users" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/castle-project-users/-/eTbUtzwyAZMJ
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/castle-project-users/-/eTbUtzwyAZMJ>.
To post to this group, send email to
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
<mailto:castle-project-users%[email protected]>.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en
<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 view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/castle-project-users/-/kJsk4S5RkAoJ.
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].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en.
