http://ayende.comAyende @ RahienCopyright (C) Ayende Rahien 2004 - 2021 (c) 202660Based on the comments, it appears that a few people haven't properly analyzed an instance of the aforementioned type. [Test] public void CanExamineComplexClass() { IFooFactoryFactoryFactoryFactory fooFactoryFactoryFactoryFactory = new Factory<Factory<Factory<Factory<Factory<IFooFactory>>>>>(); Assert.IsTrue(fooFactoryFactoryFactoryFactory is Joke); } If this was meant as a serious example, Oren would have used Boo (or written his own compiler). http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment14http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment14Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:51:11 GMTI so hope you really need that level of abstraction. http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment13http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment13Wed, 19 Dec 2007 20:07:45 GMTGenerics allow you to describe something which, when expanded, gives you a more particular something. In this case, you can say "IFooFactoryFactoryFactoryFactory" by saying "Factory<Factory<Factory<Factory<Factory<IFooFactory>>>>>", and you don't need to create (or maintain) a separate artifact. Interfaces which embed type information are usually a less-expressive way of saying the same thing with generics: IStringWidget vs. IWidget<string> They are synonymous! http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment12http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment12Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:23:09 GMTI feel so redeemed. http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment11http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment11Wed, 19 Dec 2007 16:15:39 GMTI usualy prefer the first version because it allows for a more descriptive name and it keeps the implementation (using generics) hidden. http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment10http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment10Wed, 19 Dec 2007 14:48:26 GMTI need both ! Obviously Factory<Factory<Factory<Factory<Factory<IFooFactory>>>>> implements interface IFooFactoryFactoryFactoryFactory http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment9http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment9Wed, 19 Dec 2007 13:10:06 GMTI think redesign is a good answer. I will prefer #1, the #2 one is going to cause a lot of confusion on casting as Factory<Factory... is a distinct type and it never cast to Factory... http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment8http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment8Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:06:22 GMTI'm with Nick on this one, although it seems you're also missing an AbstractFactory or two in there. /Mats http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment7http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment7Wed, 19 Dec 2007 01:20:04 GMTYou could SO use another factory to manage all that complexity! ;-) http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment6http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment6Wed, 19 Dec 2007 01:00:23 GMTI would go for the double barrel shotgun. If you need more firepower, I'll see what I can do. :-p http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment5http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment5Tue, 18 Dec 2007 23:43:36 GMTNO NO NO NO NO!!! It's Factory<Factory<Factory<Hammer>>> (For those who don't get it, read http://discuss.joelonsoftware.com/default.asp?joel.3.219431.12) http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment4http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment4Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:45:08 GMTI like the latter, because the syntax exposes a little more detail about the type, but this is only a matter of personal preference. I'll tell you one thing: it is a serious PITA to do the latter in XAML and it is pissing me off at the moment!!!!!!!! http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment3http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment3Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:36:33 GMTRedesign. http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment2http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment2Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:31:06 GMTOi... umm, is iFooFactoryFactoryFactoryFactory : Factory<Factory<Factory<Factory<Factory<IFooFactory>>>>> and are you using it more than once? If so, then the former; btw, what is wrong that you need such a structure? http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment1http://ayende.com/3055/choices#comment1Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:27:24 GMT