Danack

Hi @kelunik - I knew I was tired when I read this, but didn't realise I'd misread it completely. Although I have concerns about people using make/execute with the 2nd...

@mattsah > The __invoke() method is executed through Auryn. So what also seems like a "well-defined" interface, is not. The router resolver will essentially construct/execute to whatever you give it,...

> What do you think about adding automatic "last resort" resolving of interfaces and abstracts to shared instances? Honestly, it makes me very sad. Boostrapping applications shouldn't be magic. Having...

> How does Auryn handle argument unpacking as outlined here: It doesn't. It shouldn't. Auryn supports injecting some parameters by name because PHP is a bit shit. However supporting variadics...

I uploaded the above as a blag: http://blog.basereality.com/blog/16/Variadics_and_dependency_injection > Unfortunately due to my codebase, using delegates in this scenario makes the code more complicated. I'm going to guess that the...

> but would it not make more sense to provide the same style parameters, so in delegates case, the injector? No. Factory functions and methods should not be aware of...

btw there's probably better ways of handling this than just coding it inside Auryn e.g. either make the lookup of which alias/shared class to use either be more easily extendible...

A first draft of having the Provider info be a plugin to the Injector [is here](https://github.com/Danack/Auryn/tree/PluginExperiment2) Okay so what I've done is: 1) Separated the actual injector code from the...

Other than the fact that i) The function name sucks ii) The classes in progress get passed to the resolve function as lower case iii) a complete lack of error...

Actually this is a way lighter weight solution: https://github.com/rdlowrey/Auryn/compare/master...Danack:delegateConstructionHierarchy?expand=1 If we really wanted to trim off the last 'InjectionChain'....tbh we could leave this from version 1 until someone really needs...