You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I don't know if this is possible or not, but I would find it useful to be able to have rules associated with Types as well as namespaces. If you are trying to partition your code in "Vertical Slices" (grouping by feature, rather than by layer) you often have several different infrastructure types in the same namespace, e.g. the FooController and FooRepository are in the same directory.
It would be cool to be able to prevent the FooRepository from referencing the FooController in this situation, maybe with <Disallowed From="*Respository" FromKind="Type" To="*Controller" ToKind="Type" />
NB this doesn't mean that namespace dependencies aren't being used, it's just that they are being used to keep features apart, e.g. preventing 'EmailTemplates' from talking to 'OrderProcessor;
I'm not sure if this would work best by identifying the Types using 1. name conventions, 2. base class conventions or 3. explicit marker attributes or 4. something else.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I don't know if this is possible or not, but I would find it useful to be able to have rules associated with Types as well as namespaces. If you are trying to partition your code in "Vertical Slices"
(grouping by feature, rather than by layer) you often have several different infrastructure types in the same namespace, e.g. the FooController and FooRepository are in the same directory.
It would be cool to be able to prevent the FooRepository from referencing the FooController in this situation, maybe with
<Disallowed From="*Respository" FromKind="Type" To="*Controller" ToKind="Type" />
NB this doesn't mean that namespace dependencies aren't being used, it's just that they are being used to keep features apart, e.g. preventing 'EmailTemplates' from talking to 'OrderProcessor;
I'm not sure if this would work best by identifying the Types using 1. name conventions, 2. base class conventions or 3. explicit marker attributes or 4. something else.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: