SIF Forum Rss Feed

New Post: Dynamic Proxy without Inteface/Contract?

klpatil — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 07:27:25 GMT

Hi,

Pls see the nice post here : http://weblogs.asp.net/cibrax/archive/2006/12.aspx

Can I generate Dynamic Proxy without Interface? If you take above example then without IHelloWorld.

Sorry, If i have asked a stupid question :(

Thanks,
Kiran

New Post: "Static Proxy" OR "Dynamic Proxy"

klpatil — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 12:38:39 GMT

Hi Experts,

SIF -- Seems to be great! We need the same. But i would like to ask to all the experts suggestion for following scenario:

If i have loads of users[Say 1000] Users accessing the web service then what will be preferable to use "Static Proxy" OR "Dynamic Proxy"?

Any help/suggestions are appreciated!

Thanks,

Kiran

NEW POST: Inproc adapter sample

swatirs — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 09:34:16 GMT

I have been trying to use the inproc adapter. Does anyone have a sample or at least the configuration file that is needed for the same.

NEW POST: AsyncExecute of webservices

Klenne — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 06:38:01 GMT

Hi all,

In the servicecaller class i see there is a method called AsyncExecute. My guess is that this method allows asynchronous execution of methods.
The thing is, i don't any class that is actually using it. I use SIF a lot for the invocation of webservices. The only problem i have today is that i loose the asynchronous features of the otherwhise automatically generated proxy by Visual Studio. Is there any way to get these back and can the AsyncExecute method in the ServiceCaller class help??

BTW, the project is great , too bad there isn't a lot of activity going on for the moment!
Thnx
Klenne

NEW POST: Documentation & Samples

Klenne — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 11:00:40 GMT

Hi sborrome

What is the progress with the translation??

I really love the project, but spanish is not my best language :-)

Thnx

NEW POST: WCF Adapter

Younes — Sun, 15 Apr 2007 21:44:24 GMT

any news about WCF Adapter?

WCF Adapter:

sborrome — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 16:15:04 GMT

Not necessarily true. You could still decide to use the Remoting Adapter, or build your own adapters in case you don't want to deal with all the WCF stack. Of course you will be more limited, but you could still change the adapter in the future in case of needing the features of WCF.

Developer Forum: RE: WCF Adapter

doverall — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 13:04:19 GMT

Sounds good to me, with the release of the WCF adapter would this not realy mean that for any .NET 3.0 based solutions the only adapters that would be of value would the InProc and WCF adapters ?

User Forum: RE: Documentation & Samples

sborrome — Wed, 24 Jan 2007 18:42:23 GMT

We don't have plans to release a comprehensive documentation in the next months. Instead of that we decided to add more unit tests to reveal the designs and show the best way to use the all the components. Anyway, I have a workitem to translate all code comments to english. After completed that task we will autogenerate a .chm with the class reference. Thanks!

Developer Forum: RE: Inproc Adapter attributes

sborrome — Wed, 24 Jan 2007 18:25:16 GMT

Yes, we agree wtih you. Actually is on our wish list to recongnize some WCF attibutes.

Developer Forum: RE: WCF Adapter

sborrome — Wed, 24 Jan 2007 18:13:57 GMT

We are planning to release a CTP next week with the WCF Adapter.

Developer Forum: WCF Adapter

doverall — Thu, 11 Jan 2007 10:31:06 GMT

Whilst the currently supplied adapter are excellant is there any current work or plan to have a WCF adapter as that is something that I need to have on the project where i woudl liek to use this

User Forum: Documentation & Samples

doverall — Thu, 11 Jan 2007 10:29:59 GMT

Will there be any documention on how to use the framework and configure it

Developer Forum: Inproc Adapter attributes

doverall — Thu, 11 Jan 2007 10:27:04 GMT

Having taken a look through your code I am very impressed and looking to use it on an internal project as we need to be able to have objects can be accessed either in-proc or remotely. I have notcied in the Inproc adapter implementation there are several attribute that a "service" object must be decorated with. These attributes are very similar to the same attributes in .NET 3.0 and WCF. Would it be better to switch to supporting these attributes now that .NET 3.0 is around Dave