4 ms·
Maybe you should be using C#. As a community we fight hard to reject xml configuration, favoring type safe lambda expressions instead. Anything that ignores the
by tkellogg 14y ago
Maybe you should be using C#. As a community we fight hard to reject xml configuration, favoring type safe lambda expressions instead. Anything that ignores the type safe guarantees that C# offers quickly does. There was briefly a spring.net but it quickly died for this reason.
- SideburnsOfDoom 14y agoAgreed. Is the author's problem with IoC or with XML config? hard to tell, but they're really not the same thing. IoC containers in C# have rejected config in XML, in favour of config in code, using either generics and lambdas (e.g. register Component.For<IFoo>.ImplementedBy<Bar> ) or via scanning (e.g. AllTypes.FromAssembly(x).BasedOn<Foo>().WithService.FirstInterface() ). Spring.net was an exception and in comparison it really sucked. IoC Config in code is much better. But can't this be done in java too?
- mercurial 14y agoThat's what Guice does, and newer versions of Spring too (though I'm not sure if you can go full Java and drop the XML entirely).