i'm not suggesting that it's a good idea to do this. i just don't think
the container should impose *technical* restrictions on its use.
On Thursday, July 12, 2012 2:03:19 AM UTC-4, Krzysztof Koźmic wrote:
>
> ...none of which is valid
> In other words, that's by design.
>
> @K
>
> bling wrote:
>
>
> by all i mean explicit vs implicit:
> - Kernel.Register(Component.For<IEnumerable<int>>().Instance(new[] { 1
> }));
> -
>
> Kernel.Register(Classes.From(typeof(int[])).Pick().WithServiceAllInterfaces());
>
> On Thursday, July 12, 2012 1:59:39 AM UTC-4, Krzysztof Koźmic wrote:
>
> what do you mean by
>
>
>
> which affects all forms of registration.
>
>
>
> ?
>
> @K
>
>
> bling wrote:
>
>
>
> GetEnumerator() is a method :P, badly forced example aside, after
> digging through the code i see that the exception thrown is checking
> specifically that something is registered as IEnumerable<ValueType>,
> which affects all forms of registration.
>
> anywho, you don't need to revert the change. i can exclude anything
> that implements IEnumerable<ValueType>.
>
> however, i'd also like to hear other opinions.
>
> thanks,
> bling
>
> On Thursday, July 12, 2012 1:16:28 AM UTC-4, Krzysztof Koźmic wrote:
>
> 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>>
> <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>>>
> <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>>
> <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>
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/castle-project-users/-/eTbUtzwyAZMJ
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/castle-project-users/-/eTbUtzwyAZMJ>>
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/castle-project-users/-/eTbUtzwyAZMJ
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/castle-project-users/-/eTbUtzwyAZMJ>
> <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]>
> <mailto:[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>>
> <mailto:[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>
> <mailto:[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>>>.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]
> <mailto:castle-project-users%[email protected]>
> <mailto:castle-project-users%[email protected]
> <mailto:castle-project-users%[email protected]>>
> <mailto:castle-project-users%[email protected]
> <mailto:castle-project-users%[email protected]>
> <mailto:castle-project-users%[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>
> <http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en
> <http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en>>
> <http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en
> <http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en>
> <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
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/castle-project-users/-/kJsk4S5RkAoJ>
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/castle-project-users/-/kJsk4S5RkAoJ
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/castle-project-users/-/kJsk4S5RkAoJ
> >>.
> To post to this group, send email to
> [email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>
> <mailto:[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>>.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]
> <mailto:castle-project-users%[email protected]>
> <mailto:castle-project-users%[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>
> <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/-/QKsGQAb3LhYJ
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/castle-project-users/-/QKsGQAb3LhYJ>.
> 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/-/WezzrFNm9EUJ.
> 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 view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/castle-project-users/-/sLVNQFk5ncAJ.
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.
