Re: [Springnet-developer] Object creation invokingprotected constructors?

[Erich E. <E.E...@di...>]

Hi Stepen,
=20
playing the "advocatus diaboli" now: How do you write tests for this =
class then? If your design does not allow for instantiating the class, =
why should Spring be allowed to?
=20
-Erich


________________________________

	From: spr...@li... =
[mailto:spr...@li...] On Behalf Of =
Trudel, Stephen
	Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 1:40 PM
	To: Erich Eichinger; springnet-developer
	Subject: Re: [Springnet-developer] Object creation invokingprotected =
constructors?
=09
=09
	Related question ... does Spring.Net support object construction for =
objects with internal constructors?  If one does not want the =
instantiation of an object to be allowed outside the scope of a module =
for purposes of conceptual integrity or otherwise then Spring.Net should =
support its construction in my opinion ... seem somewhat awkward when =
class design is influenced by a framework ...=20
=09
	=20
________________________________

	From: spr...@li... =
[mailto:spr...@li...] On Behalf Of =
Erich Eichinger
	Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2007 6:36 AM
	To: springnet-developer
	Subject: [Springnet-developer] Object creation invoking protected =
constructors?
=09
=09
	Steinar on the forum asked this here: =
http://forum.springframework.net/showthread.php?t=3D3448
	=20
	I'd like to revisit the design decision to not allow accessing =
non-public types/constructors/methods/properties and hear your opinions =
on this.
	=20
	I recently ran into this issue myself when trying to provide a DI =
capable wrapper for "System.Web.UI.SimpleHandlerFactory" from System.Web =
assembly. This type is internal and can't be instantiated using Spring =
which required to implement a (non-trivial) workaround. The easy way =
would be to remove the restriction to public types.
	=20
	I know of opinions out there to don't enforce any restrictions within =
the framework. Developers should know what they are doing and if someone =
wants to instantiate a non-public type, let him do it at his own risk.
	=20
	Other opinions?
	=20
	cheers,
	Erich
	=20