I\'ve been using spring.net with xml configuration for some times, and I just saw that spring team released CodeConfig a month ago.
What I like about the xml config is t
With code config, possible benefits you could get are:
Benefit of the last point is also that developers new to the framework will have a significantly less steep learning curve than with the xml config.
From the docs:
While there are several positive aspects to expressing configuration metadata in XML files, there are also many problems with this approach including the verbosity of XML and its heavy dependence on string-literals which are both prone to typing errors and unusually resistant to most modern refactoring tools in use today. The CodeConfig approach removes these problems by providing a type safe, code-based, approach to dependency injection. It keeps the configuration metadatda external to your class so your class can be a POCO, free of any DI related annotations.