<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.2" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: How to avoid tight IoC coupling in non-deterministic resolution scenarios?</title>
	<link>http://rabdullin.com/how-to-avoid-tight-ioc-coupling-in-non-deterministic-resolution-scenarios/</link>
	<description>Moving towards the efficient development of smart software solutions</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 14:01:59 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: How to implement unit-testable abstraction and reusable domain models with IoC + ORM? at Rinat Abdullin</title>
		<link>http://rabdullin.com/how-to-avoid-tight-ioc-coupling-in-non-deterministic-resolution-scenarios/#comment-407</link>
		<dc:creator>How to implement unit-testable abstraction and reusable domain models with IoC + ORM? at Rinat Abdullin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2008 20:26:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://rabdullin.com/how-to-avoid-tight-ioc-coupling-in-non-deterministic-resolution-scenarios/#comment-407</guid>
		<description>[...] is a bit similar to the Resolver pattern of abstracting away from IoC, that I&#8217;ve talked about before. But there is an important modification in this scenario: resolution calls upon the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] is a bit similar to the Resolver pattern of abstracting away from IoC, that I&#8217;ve talked about before. But there is an important modification in this scenario: resolution calls upon the [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: How to use ORM (XPO), IoC, C# 3.5 syntax, Linq and .NET 2.0 together? at Rinat Abdullin</title>
		<link>http://rabdullin.com/how-to-avoid-tight-ioc-coupling-in-non-deterministic-resolution-scenarios/#comment-395</link>
		<dc:creator>How to use ORM (XPO), IoC, C# 3.5 syntax, Linq and .NET 2.0 together? at Rinat Abdullin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 19:08:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://rabdullin.com/how-to-avoid-tight-ioc-coupling-in-non-deterministic-resolution-scenarios/#comment-395</guid>
		<description>[...] How to avoid tight IoC coupling in non-deterministic resolution scenarios? [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] How to avoid tight IoC coupling in non-deterministic resolution scenarios? [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: How to decouple your code from ORM (XPO) while granting it the power to IoC? at Rinat Abdullin</title>
		<link>http://rabdullin.com/how-to-avoid-tight-ioc-coupling-in-non-deterministic-resolution-scenarios/#comment-375</link>
		<dc:creator>How to decouple your code from ORM (XPO) while granting it the power to IoC? at Rinat Abdullin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Mar 2008 11:04:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://rabdullin.com/how-to-avoid-tight-ioc-coupling-in-non-deterministic-resolution-scenarios/#comment-375</guid>
		<description>[...] it seems that in addition to ruling the IoC coupling out of the component code (while keeping its resolution powers in) we can simply rule out the entire ORM out of the code as [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] it seems that in addition to ruling the IoC coupling out of the component code (while keeping its resolution powers in) we can simply rule out the entire ORM out of the code as [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
