About a year ago I wrote a comparison of .NET IoC frameworks (part 1, part 2), which turned out to be somewhat popular. I was pretty sure it is quite obsolete by now.

However, when Chris Tacke asked me to review OpenNETCF IoC framework (built for .NET CF) I have decided to update the charts on Google Code wiki.

Now I updated all frameworks there to the latest versions. I am not sure I got everything correctly this time, because I didn’t want to spend too much time on this. If I made an error in description of your framework features, just tell.

It is interesting that there are almost no significant changes in tests I have. Changes seem to slow down since the time I was writing the original posts. I think there are two reasons for that: frameworks being feature-complete enough not to need rapid evolution and me missing new features because my original test scope is somewhat obsolete. I am almost sure I will not have time to research all new developments, which is unfortunate.

As I said in a previous post, in addition to the charts, Google Code project has test adapters for all frameworks, which can be used as sample integration code. If there is something I do with your framework that can be done in a better way, tell me. I will also grant write rights on repository to any interested framework authors.

  • http://blog.ashmind.com/index.php/2008/09/08/comparing-net-di-ioc-frameworks-part-2/ Comparing .NET DI (IoC) Frameworks, Part 2 » Blog Archive » I Think It’s Interesting

    [...] .NET DI (IoC) Frameworks, Revisited [...]

  • http://www.google.com/profiles/wcoenen wcoenen

    There is now also the managed extensions framework, which will be included in .NET 4.0 as the System.ComponentModel.Composition namespace.

    There is a lot of handwaving about MEF not being an IoC framework but I'm pretty sure that it belongs in this list.

  • http://blog.ashmind.com Andrey Shchekin

    Yes, I think while MEF is not just an IoC framework, it does contain an implementation of basic IoC framework. So I should add it to the review, will probably do later.