Jon Takes Five with Javier Lozano on MVC Turbine

Play Jon Takes Five with Javier Lozano on MVC Turbine

The Discussion

  • User profile image

    Abstracting your favorite IoC container is a really terrible idea. Why would you use Unity over StructureMap over NInject, etc if you're just going to abstract away the power? Doesn't make a lot of sense from an architectural perspective. Why take on an additional dependency that is just an abstraction on IoC and dependency containers, wire-ups, etc?


    And another thing... infered actions. Why would you use MVC if you're just returning a view? Smells exactly like webforms at that point.

  • User profile image

    @zowens, yes abstracting your favorite IoC container is a terrible idea since, as you stated you lose all the power and features it provides to have a lowest common denominator solution. The purpose of MVC Turbine is not to replace your IoC but to add composition to MVC applications.  I've covered this conversation before with my MVC Turbine Redux as well with podcasts, so I see no point on rehashing the information in this comment.


    Support for IoC at all levels of an MVC application is something that's so important to ASP.NET developers that has been added to the feature roadmap for MVC3. Although MVC Turbine is not the ideal solution, it does help shed light on the issue and provides a tangible solution to this recurring theme.

  • User profile image

    Exactly, it's not about abstracting your favorite IoC container, it's just a by-result of not taking a dependency on a specific container which is a bigger gain than lose in case of MVCTurbine, you still can use 99% of the power of your favorite container (and its extensions).


    @jglozano: I watched the video and the idea of injecting dependencies into http modules is seeeet Smiley

    The 2.1 bits are great giving you ways to cover for the 1% of less common scenarios if you really need that and know the drawbacks.

    Good luck with the project!


Add Your 2 Cents