[Grok-dev] Alternatives to Grok for Interface based dependency injection
do3ccqrv at googlemail.com
Thu May 21 18:43:09 EDT 2009
first, if some are interested in your results of the evaluation, is there
some place where one can read something about the results? I am curious.
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 19:38, Alec Munro <alecmunro at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi List,
> (I believe this is known as a GBCW message, though I'm not sure what
> that stands for)
> After wrestling with Grok's installation on and off for the past 6
> months, I have finally come to accept that it currently doesn't
> provide us a compelling enough reason to accept that pain (and I got
> real tired of troubleshooting when people would be unable to install
> my software because of one of Grok's dependencies). Our primary use of
> Grok is the adaptation mechanism, and we specifically use it as an
> interface driven dependency injection tool. However, I realized today
> that the way we had been doing that, with adapter lookups as needed,
> often in the middle of other code, reduced our code clarity and
> testability, by adding an additional dependency that was not easily
> apparent to someone looking at initializer or method signatures.
If I understand you correctly, you have two issues, one is the installation
issues under windows, about which I can't say a thing.
Your other issue is about the dependency of your code to the component
architecture, and that you would like to be able to test code without that
dependency, at least this is what I understood.
You might be able to solve this by writing your own grokkers, that could
inject your dependencies during grokking time. For testing you could fill
the dependencies in another way. That functionality is part of martian. Have
you taken a look into that?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Grok-dev