I'm currently putting together a Xamarin app using MvvmCross but am encountering a strange error in my first view when I call SetContentView in OnCreate on Android.
"Failed to resolve type Cirrious.MvvmCross.Binding.Droid.Binders.IMvxLayoutInfactorFactoryFactory"
at Cirrious.CrossCore.IoC.MvxSimpleIoCContainer.Resolve (System.Type t)[0x0003a] in <filename unknown>:0
at Cirrious.CrossCore.IoC.MvxSimpleIoCContainer.Resolve[IMvxLayoutInfactorFactoryFactory] () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
at Cirrious.CrossCore.Mvx.Resolve[IMvxLayoutInfactorFactoryFactory] () [0x00006] in <filename unknown>:0
at Cirrious.MvvmCross.Binding.Droid.BindingContext.MvxAndroidBindingContext.get_FactoryFactory () [0x00008] in <filename unknown>:0
at Cirrious.MvvmCross.Binding.Droid.BindingContext.MvxAndroidBindingContext.BindingInflate (Int32 resourceId, Android.Views.ViewGroup viewGroup, Boolean attachToRoot) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
at Cirrious.MvvmCross.Binding.Droid.BindingContext.MvxAndroidBindingContext.BindingInflate (Int32 resourceId, Android.Views.ViewGroup viewGroup) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
at Cirrious.MvvmCross.Binding.Droid.BindingContext.MvxBindingContextOwnerExtensions.BindingInflate (IMvxBindingContextOwner owner, Int32 resourceId, Android.Views.ViewGroup viewGroup) [0x0000c] in <filename unknown>:0
at Cirrious.MvvmCross.Droid.Views.MvxActivity.SetContentView (Int32 layoutResId) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
at MyAviva.Droid.TermsAndConditionsView.OnCreate (Android.OS.Bundle bundle) [0x0000a] in d:\Data\WALPOB1\My Documents\Projects\MyAviva-NewArchitecture\MyAviva.Droid\MyAviva.Droid\TermsAndConditionsView.cs:30
The problem appears to happen when MvvmCross is attempting to handle data binding but I currently haven't configured any data binding between my view and view model.
What is the purpose of the IMvxLayoutInfactorFactoryFactory interface and what might the causes of this exception be?
EDIT So it seems if I make my App Start class implement IMvxConsumer then that fixes the problem, but since this is marked obsolete I'd like to understand why this fixes it and what the better method would be.
Regards,
Ben