Anton Ukhanev
Anton Ukhanev
It's true, I'd really like to see some typical scenarios, as from the tests it's pretty hard to figure out where to start from. Could that be possible? Your library...
Does this mean that development of Assembly will be discontinued? If not, as an implementation it is still free to include this feature. I could implement this and submit a...
Got it. WRT `service-provider`, I appreciate that this approach is much simpler. However, personally I prefer to go the opposite way: make a complex standard/implementation that defines everything in an...
Oh, to answer your question: Because I don't want to depend on any concrete implementation of a container. Additionally, it's a lot of code for nothing. Doesn't feel right. I...
Yea, for now I'm using it just for tests. But either way, I want the user of my code to be able to choose the container implementation. However, if I...
Another advantage of `definition-interop` over `service-provider`, and probably the main one, is that if it gets accepted, a standards-compliant complex implementation is actually possible. Without it, container implementations are forced...
I believe that any function should do what it is meant to do, or throw. The purpose of a router is to resolve a set of parameters to a route....
By the way, the argument about this lib being low-level, and therefore shouldn't throw, is a non-argument IMHO. My personal opinion is that things which are low-level should throw even...
Also, whether or not this library is low-level is debatable, because it really depends on how/why it is consumed. I can easily imagine an application that consists only of routing...