This project is read-only.

Got any comments or suggestions?

Coordinator
Feb 16, 2009 at 3:00 PM
We'd love to hear what you think CThru or SilverUnit should do better!
Feb 26, 2009 at 7:53 PM
Roy,

I've uplodaded and played a little with CThru code and corresponding unit tests. In order to understand better CThru and FluentAOP I would like to know how where do you see their places in development of custom aspects. Let's take FluentAOP: it looks quite handy, however you did not use it when implementing SilverUnit, you based it directly on CThru. Can you clarify what would be good cases to use FluentAOP rather doing everything using CThru?

I am thinking about using CThru to simplify isolation of databases (SQL server) and Web services. Is there anything special I should bear in mind when "cthru-fying" WS proxies?

Vagif
Coordinator
Feb 26, 2009 at 9:42 PM
FluentAop came *After* SilverUnit so it is not used in it. It would make the code in it easier to read, I would easily say.
Feb 27, 2009 at 3:33 AM
Would you consider then making FluentAop a part of CThru engine? I am thinking references and deployment. If FluentAop makes use of CThru engine easier (and its code and tests are much easier to read indead), then there are good chances that developers who create their own aspects will do it via FluentAop. Is it worth having multiple projects and assemblies? Even though FluentAop is built on the top CThru and does not add new functionality, can it become a part of CThru? If not part of the same assembly, then at least part of the same project, e.g. CThru.Aop namespace?
Coordinator
Feb 27, 2009 at 9:04 AM
its possible. maybe you should become a contributor on this project?
Feb 27, 2009 at 9:29 AM
Sounds interesting, although I never contributed to CodePlex projects, so I need some time to figure out this stuff. I will play more with CThru/AOP during this weekend, and if I come up with something that might be useful as a contirbution, you can include me as a contributor.