Hello, On 28 Dec 2015, at 20:26, Andrus Adamchik <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 28, 2015, at 05:28 PM, Miguel Arroz wrote: >> Just because those frameworks don’t explicitly have abominations like >> dependency injection mechanisms, it doesn’t mean they don’t follow the IoC >> principles. > > Heh, there are DI frameworks out there that may be called abominations, but > DI itself simply facilitates a very clean pluggable architecture if you use > it right. And no, WO/EOF doesn't have it. And yes, it is a problem. Just ask > the folks who are trying to write unit tests against EOF ;) Absolutely. Proper DI facilities make things a lot easier to test. And the code much cleaner. Wouldn’t it be nice to have something like @Autowired EOEditingContext editingContext; instead of EOEditingContext editingContext = ERXEC.newEditingContext() perhaps even with some rule based setup, aka: D2W meets DI? Just thinking out loud. J.
_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected]) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [email protected]
