Mixing
Decorator - Equivalent XML configuration for a Fluent Confuguration
0
I have a single interface(ICommonInterface) and two implementations (WrapperImplementation, CoreImplementation) of that interface.
One implementation makes use of the other implementation...that is WrapperImplementation has, in it's constructor, a parameter of ICommonInterface which is expected to be CoreImplementation
An example of how it would all come together is:
public interface ICommonInterface
{
void DoSomething();
}
public class CoreImplementation: ICommonInterface
{
public CoreImplementation()
{
}
public void DoSomething()
{
//some implementation
}
}
public class WrapperImplementation : ICommonInterface
{
private readonly ICommonInterface _coreImplementation;
public WrapperImplementation(ICommonInterface coreImplementation)
{
_coreImplementation = coreImplementation;
}
public void DoSomething()
{
_coreImplementation.DoSomething();
}
}
Using the fluent approach (this has worked perfectly before for our purposes):
container.Register(
Component.For<ICommonInterface>().ImplementedBy<MyNameSpace.WrapperImplementation>().Named("WrapperImplementation").LifestyleSingleton(),
Component.For<ICommonInterface>().ImplementedBy<MyNameSpace.CoreImplementation>().Named("CoreImplementation"));
How do I do the same using an XML config?
<component id="WrapperImplementation" service="MyNameSpace.ICommonInterface, MyNameSpace" type="MyNameSpace.WrapperImplementation, MyNameSpace" />
<component id="CoreImplementation" service="MyNameSpace.ICommonInterface, MyNameSpace" type="MyNameSpace.CoreImplementation, MyNameSpace" />
I have read the following and I do not see an equivalent XML config for the Fluent one:
- Using XML configuration
- Registering components in XML
- How do I configure a decorator with Castle Windsor?
c# xml configuration inversion-of-control castle-windsor
edited Nov 28 '18 at 6:05
Krzysztof Kozmic
23.4k1162106
asked Nov 21 '18 at 11:37
user919426user919426
4,19463254
add a comment |
0
I have a single interface(ICommonInterface) and two implementations (WrapperImplementation, CoreImplementation) of that interface.
One implementation makes use of the other implementation...that is WrapperImplementation has, in it's constructor, a parameter of ICommonInterface which is expected to be CoreImplementation
An example of how it would all come together is:
public interface ICommonInterface
{
void DoSomething();
}
public class CoreImplementation: ICommonInterface
{
public CoreImplementation()
{
}
public void DoSomething()
{
//some implementation
}
}
public class WrapperImplementation : ICommonInterface
{
private readonly ICommonInterface _coreImplementation;
public WrapperImplementation(ICommonInterface coreImplementation)
{
_coreImplementation = coreImplementation;
}
public void DoSomething()
{
_coreImplementation.DoSomething();
}
}
Using the fluent approach (this has worked perfectly before for our purposes):
container.Register(
Component.For<ICommonInterface>().ImplementedBy<MyNameSpace.WrapperImplementation>().Named("WrapperImplementation").LifestyleSingleton(),
Component.For<ICommonInterface>().ImplementedBy<MyNameSpace.CoreImplementation>().Named("CoreImplementation"));
How do I do the same using an XML config?
<component id="WrapperImplementation" service="MyNameSpace.ICommonInterface, MyNameSpace" type="MyNameSpace.WrapperImplementation, MyNameSpace" />
<component id="CoreImplementation" service="MyNameSpace.ICommonInterface, MyNameSpace" type="MyNameSpace.CoreImplementation, MyNameSpace" />
I have read the following and I do not see an equivalent XML config for the Fluent one:
- Using XML configuration
- Registering components in XML
- How do I configure a decorator with Castle Windsor?
c# xml configuration inversion-of-control castle-windsor
edited Nov 28 '18 at 6:05
Krzysztof Kozmic
23.4k1162106
asked Nov 21 '18 at 11:37
user919426user919426
4,19463254
Leaving aside the question of why you'd switch from code registration to XML, which I'm assuming you have a good reason for, I'm not sure I fully understand the question being asked. The XML sample you posted should already give you a reliable decorator behaviour, since in XML registration, same as code the order is significant. Are you saying it doesn't work as you expected or am I missing something in your question?
– Krzysztof Kozmic
Nov 23 '18 at 7:06
add a comment |
0
0
0
I have a single interface(ICommonInterface) and two implementations (WrapperImplementation, CoreImplementation) of that interface.
One implementation makes use of the other implementation...that is WrapperImplementation has, in it's constructor, a parameter of ICommonInterface which is expected to be CoreImplementation
An example of how it would all come together is:
public interface ICommonInterface
{
void DoSomething();
}
public class CoreImplementation: ICommonInterface
{
public CoreImplementation()
{
}
public void DoSomething()
{
//some implementation
}
}
public class WrapperImplementation : ICommonInterface
{
private readonly ICommonInterface _coreImplementation;
public WrapperImplementation(ICommonInterface coreImplementation)
{
_coreImplementation = coreImplementation;
}
public void DoSomething()
{
_coreImplementation.DoSomething();
}
}
Using the fluent approach (this has worked perfectly before for our purposes):
container.Register(
Component.For<ICommonInterface>().ImplementedBy<MyNameSpace.WrapperImplementation>().Named("WrapperImplementation").LifestyleSingleton(),
Component.For<ICommonInterface>().ImplementedBy<MyNameSpace.CoreImplementation>().Named("CoreImplementation"));
How do I do the same using an XML config?
<component id="WrapperImplementation" service="MyNameSpace.ICommonInterface, MyNameSpace" type="MyNameSpace.WrapperImplementation, MyNameSpace" />
<component id="CoreImplementation" service="MyNameSpace.ICommonInterface, MyNameSpace" type="MyNameSpace.CoreImplementation, MyNameSpace" />
I have read the following and I do not see an equivalent XML config for the Fluent one:
- Using XML configuration
- Registering components in XML
- How do I configure a decorator with Castle Windsor?
c# xml configuration inversion-of-control castle-windsor
edited Nov 28 '18 at 6:05
Krzysztof Kozmic
23.4k1162106
asked Nov 21 '18 at 11:37
user919426user919426
4,19463254
I have a single interface(ICommonInterface) and two implementations (WrapperImplementation, CoreImplementation) of that interface.
One implementation makes use of the other implementation...that is WrapperImplementation has, in it's constructor, a parameter of ICommonInterface which is expected to be CoreImplementation
An example of how it would all come together is:
public interface ICommonInterface
{
void DoSomething();
}
public class CoreImplementation: ICommonInterface
{
public CoreImplementation()
{
}
public void DoSomething()
{
//some implementation
}
}
public class WrapperImplementation : ICommonInterface
{
private readonly ICommonInterface _coreImplementation;
public WrapperImplementation(ICommonInterface coreImplementation)
{
_coreImplementation = coreImplementation;
}
public void DoSomething()
{
_coreImplementation.DoSomething();
}
}
Using the fluent approach (this has worked perfectly before for our purposes):
container.Register(
Component.For<ICommonInterface>().ImplementedBy<MyNameSpace.WrapperImplementation>().Named("WrapperImplementation").LifestyleSingleton(),
Component.For<ICommonInterface>().ImplementedBy<MyNameSpace.CoreImplementation>().Named("CoreImplementation"));
How do I do the same using an XML config?
<component id="WrapperImplementation" service="MyNameSpace.ICommonInterface, MyNameSpace" type="MyNameSpace.WrapperImplementation, MyNameSpace" />
<component id="CoreImplementation" service="MyNameSpace.ICommonInterface, MyNameSpace" type="MyNameSpace.CoreImplementation, MyNameSpace" />
I have read the following and I do not see an equivalent XML config for the Fluent one:
- Using XML configuration
- Registering components in XML
- How do I configure a decorator with Castle Windsor?
c# xml configuration inversion-of-control castle-windsor
c# xml configuration inversion-of-control castle-windsor
edited Nov 28 '18 at 6:05
Krzysztof Kozmic
23.4k1162106
asked Nov 21 '18 at 11:37
user919426user919426
4,19463254
edited Nov 28 '18 at 6:05
Krzysztof Kozmic
23.4k1162106
asked Nov 21 '18 at 11:37
user919426user919426
4,19463254
edited Nov 28 '18 at 6:05
Krzysztof Kozmic
23.4k1162106
edited Nov 28 '18 at 6:05
Krzysztof Kozmic
23.4k1162106
edited Nov 28 '18 at 6:05
Krzysztof Kozmic
23.4k1162106
23.4k1162106
asked Nov 21 '18 at 11:37
user919426user919426
4,19463254
asked Nov 21 '18 at 11:37
user919426user919426
4,19463254
asked Nov 21 '18 at 11:37
user919426user919426
4,19463254
4,19463254
Leaving aside the question of why you'd switch from code registration to XML, which I'm assuming you have a good reason for, I'm not sure I fully understand the question being asked. The XML sample you posted should already give you a reliable decorator behaviour, since in XML registration, same as code the order is significant. Are you saying it doesn't work as you expected or am I missing something in your question?
– Krzysztof Kozmic
Nov 23 '18 at 7:06
add a comment |
Leaving aside the question of why you'd switch from code registration to XML, which I'm assuming you have a good reason for, I'm not sure I fully understand the question being asked. The XML sample you posted should already give you a reliable decorator behaviour, since in XML registration, same as code the order is significant. Are you saying it doesn't work as you expected or am I missing something in your question?
– Krzysztof Kozmic
Nov 23 '18 at 7:06
Leaving aside the question of why you'd switch from code registration to XML, which I'm assuming you have a good reason for, I'm not sure I fully understand the question being asked. The XML sample you posted should already give you a reliable decorator behaviour, since in XML registration, same as code the order is significant. Are you saying it doesn't work as you expected or am I missing something in your question?
– Krzysztof Kozmic
Nov 23 '18 at 7:06
Leaving aside the question of why you'd switch from code registration to XML, which I'm assuming you have a good reason for, I'm not sure I fully understand the question being asked. The XML sample you posted should already give you a reliable decorator behaviour, since in XML registration, same as code the order is significant. Are you saying it doesn't work as you expected or am I missing something in your question?
– Krzysztof Kozmic
Nov 23 '18 at 7:06
add a comment |
0
active
oldest
votes
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53411237%2fdecorator-equivalent-xml-configuration-for-a-fluent-confuguration%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
draft saved
draft discarded
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53411237%2fdecorator-equivalent-xml-configuration-for-a-fluent-confuguration%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Leaving aside the question of why you'd switch from code registration to XML, which I'm assuming you have a good reason for, I'm not sure I fully understand the question being asked. The XML sample you posted should already give you a reliable decorator behaviour, since in XML registration, same as code the order is significant. Are you saying it doesn't work as you expected or am I missing something in your question?
– Krzysztof Kozmic
Nov 23 '18 at 7:06