Vadim Gritsenko wrote: > Carsten Ziegeler wrote: > >>So I'm coming back to my idea, is anyone against adding constructor >>injection to ECM++ or at least make it pluggable so I can add it for my >>own projects? The change adds only a feature while maintaining 100% >>compatibility. > > > Why not setter injection? > Because I don't need it :) As you have seen in this thread there are many arguments about a "confusing" mechanism or "hack" or whatever. My opinion is that while constructor injection is a clean approach, setter injection might really be more confusion. But as I already said, if someone wants to add setter injection as well, I'm not against it.
Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler - Open Source Group, S&N AG http://www.s-und-n.de http://www.osoco.org/weblogs/rael/
