Exposing internal members of an assembly

Tech-Archive recommends: Speed Up your PC by fixing your registry

Hi,

I am trying to have a set of base classes and interfaces of an
application framework in their own assembly. That way, concrete
implementations of the API will reference that assembly and implement
the abstract classes and interfaces.

The problem is that some parts of the API are "internal" in the sense
that they are internal to the implementation. If I declare these parts
as internal in the API, the implementations will not be able to access
them.

The reason behind using "internal" members is to eliminate the need for
the proxy design pattern so I can pass objects between the implemation
and the GUI directly whilst ensuring that the appropriate access levels
are maintained.

Any thoughts?

Thank you,

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Pointer to "base" type - what does the Standard say about this?
    ... Since the `api' is the first element ... in each struct, it is always safe to convert the struct pointer to ... all of my implementations can (and in fact ... The interfaces are used by the rest of the ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: Exposing internal members of an assembly
    ... the abstract classes and interfaces. ... The problem is that some parts of the API are "internal" in the sense ... the implementations will not be able to access ... So you want the derived classes to have access to the members in the ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • Re: Declaring a Constructor in an Interface?
    ... All these objects have completely different implementations ... i use interfaces rather than abstract classes for this. ... Abstract base classes don't have that feature - you> can only have a single base class. ... For example, if you derive from XmlReader,> not only does that mean that your class provides the XmlReader API, it also> means you get a certain amount of help: you are not obliged to implement the> entire thing from scratch. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • Re: Declaring a Constructor in an Interface?
    ... classes and interfaces is so small that you can ignore it for the vast ... can only have a single base class. ... not only does that mean that your class provides the XmlReader API, ... implementations are now broken, because they don't supply this new method. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • Re: Interface vs. Abstract Class
    ... Because mock frameworks such as EasyMockNET can only mock interfaces ... abstract base class, but I prefer to get frameworks to do all that at ... The current .NET implementations are clunky in ... interfaces but you can't derive from multiple base classes. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)