Prism integration, does "shouldn't" equal "not advisable, stay away, no no no don't"?

Topics: Actions & Coroutines, Bootstrappers & IoC, Getting Started
Nov 3, 2011 at 4:37 PM

I'm in a situation where we have a large WPF application which has been built on Prism. However I find myself really wanting to use Actions and Coroutines to solve some of the databinding wordiness and issues that we encounter (there are other nice features like conventions, but lets not touch on that for now). 

Now assuming I have no choice but to leave the Prism underpinnings intact (which is the case here), does the advice to not integrate basically mean I need to look somewhere else to get the niceness of Actions (I love that syntax as opposed to the large amount of code required to use the same System.Windows.Interactivity functionality)? 

(And no I can't use the original Caliburn because it is too heavy to justify it's use, read that as my boss will say no).

Nov 3, 2011 at 4:54 PM

I don't think there's any practical issue integrating the two. I believe if you search these forums, you might find some discussion on how to do it. I'm not the most knowledgeable, so perhaps someone else can comment with more detail.

Nov 3, 2011 at 5:01 PM

Ok. Well I wanted to be sure there weren't any technical issues, or huge red flags why this is not advised, before I looked into adding this integration into a Prism project. 

We are already behind as far as Prism (not on Prism 4.0, though we are on .NEt 4.0), so maybe eventually I can champion a move off of Prism to something much more in house, combined with Caliburn.Micro. I agree that MEF does enough from a modularity standpoint, and RegionManager doesn't add enough to justify Prism on its own, but thats my lone opinion (here at work).

Thanks. And any feedback from others is welcomed.