I have a service class, and the service have one method getSomethingFromApi , now , I want to have play Configuration instance so I can pull stuff from the application.conf, and a play WSClient so I can perform http calls.
this is how I want my service to look:
class MyApiService {
def getSomethingFromApi(whichApi: String): Future[ApiRes] = {
wsClient.url(configuration.getString(whichApi)).withHttpHeaders(("Content-Type", "application/json")).get.map { res =>
response.status match {
case Status.OK => // do something
case _ => throw new Exception
}
}
}
}
and this is the ServicesModule that is wiring my services:
import com.softwaremill.macwire._
trait ServicesModule {
lazy val myService: MyApiService = wire[MyApiService]
}
my question now is what is the right way of using wiring play Configuration and WSClient instances..? cause currently i need those instances in my service but i dont have them, how should i do this the right way?
thanks
With macwire it'll probably look like this
// MyApiService.scala
class MyApiService(wsClient: WSClient) { ... }
// ServicesModule.scala
trait ServicesModule with NingWSComponents {
lazy val wsClient = wire[WSClient]
lazy val apiService = wire[MyApiService]
}
I haven't tried using macwire with play myself, so I have relatively low confidence that it'll work on the first try, but macwire play example suggests mixing in certain Play modules to provide values needed for WSClient. Most likely not all of them are needed, but some might be - soo I'd suggest starting with just NingWSComponents and gradually adding more until it works.
For the configuration I suggest using something like PureConfig and load the configuration as follows
import pureconfig._
import pureconfig.error.ConfigReaderFailures
case class YourConfClass(name: String, quantity: Int)
val config: Either[pureconfig.error.ConfigReaderFailures,YourConfClass] = loadConfig[YourConfClass]
This then can be passed on to any component of your app using macwire.
As of Play 2.6.X one should use AhcWSComponents that are provided by the ws dependency as follows:
In your build.sbt file add the ws dependency to your project
libraryDependencies += ws
In your module trait mix-in the AhcWSComponents trait and wire the WSClient
trait ServicesModule with AhcWSComponents {
lazy val wsClient = wire[WSClient]
lazy val apiService = wire[MyApiService]
}
In your MyApiService add the WSClient as a param. to the constructor
class MyApiService(wsClient: WSClient) { ... }
And now you're done. This general rule applies to all provided dependencies.
I would like implement a Guice module which binds an adapter to a named argument, but to create this adapter, it needs to instantiate another class, which also need injected arguments.
Here is the example in Scala:
trait Service
class UserService #Inject()(#Named(value = "foo") foo: String) extends Service
trait Adapter
class AdapterImpl(service: Service) extends Adapter
class AdapterRef(val adapter: Adapter)
class Module extends AbstractModule {
override def configure(): Unit = {
val fooValue = "bar"
bind(classOf[String])
.annotatedWith(Names.named("foo"))
.toInstance(fooValue)
val userService = new UserService(fooValue) //It should be instantiated by Guice somehow
bind(classOf[AdapterRef])
.annotatedWith(Names.named("userService"))
.toInstance(new AdapterRef(new AdapterImpl(userService))) //Thats kinda ok
}
}
Can someone point me to the right direction?
Thank you,
Gabor
You can use a Provides method within your module, which lets you remove the binding. This is my best effort at Scala so if the syntax is incorrect let me know.
#Provides() #Singleton() def provideAdapterRef(service: Service): AdapterRef = {
return new AdapterRef(new AdapterImpl(service))
}
Note the use of Singleton to imitate your examples use of toInstance. If you don't need it to always provide the same instance I would recommend removing the scope and letting it create a new one every time.
An alternative solution is to use a Provider. This requires you to keep a modified version of the binding in your module and create an extra class, but it can be a cleaner solution if your Provider is more complex.
//Can inject UserService as well, or provide annotations to configure which
//implementation of Service you get if you have more than one.
class UserServiceProvider #Inject()(service: Service) extends Provider[AdapterRef] {
override def get(): AdapterRef {
return new AdapterRef(new AdapterImpl(service))
}
}
Then you can change your binding in the module to
bind(classOf[AdapterRef])
.annotatedWith(Names.named("userService"))
.toProvider(classOf[UserServiceProvider])
.in(classOf[Singleton])
Here note the use of in(Singleton) to replicate your toInstance behavior.
In the twitter-clone example, the following firebase client is defined:
#Singleton
class FirebaseClient #Inject()(
httpClient: HttpClient,
mapper: FinatraObjectMapper) {
// ...
}
I would like to write a test that uses this class. The problem I have is that I cannot simply instanciate a variable of this class in my test code:
class FirebaseClientTest extends ??? {
val firebaseClient: FirebaseClient = new FirebaseClient(???, ???)
}
Since I don't know how an instance of HttpClient and FinatraObjectMapper is actually created in the production code. I could try to create these objects manually, but this adds boilerplate which I'd like to avoid.
How can I get an instance of FirebaseClient by the magic of the dependecy injection mechanisms used in Finatra?
The answer to this question is detailed in the finatra-users group. I'm summarizing it here for the sake of completeness.
Basically instances that require dependencies to be injected can be obtained by using the TestInjector class. For the problem at hand, a FirebaseClient instance can be obtained as follows:
class FirebaseClientTest extends SomeClassOfATestFramework {
val injector = TestInjector(FirebaseClientModule)
val firebaseClient: FirebaseClient = injector.instance[FirebaseClient]
}
I have project with manual dependency injection. Can I test my application with standard Play test suite?
play.application.loader="AppLoader"
class AppLoader extends ApplicationLoader {
override def load(context: Context): Application = {
LoggerConfigurator(context.environment.classLoader).foreach(_.configure(context.environment))
new AppComponents(context).application
}
}
}
class AppComponents(context: Context) extends BuiltInComponentsFromContext(context) with EhCacheComponents with EvolutionsComponents with DBComponents with HikariCPComponents{
lazy val applicationController = new controllers.Application(defaultCacheApi, dbApi.database("default"))
lazy val usersController = new controllers.Users(defaultCacheApi)
lazy val assets = new controllers.Assets(httpErrorHandler)
//applicationEvolutions
// Routes is a generated class
override def router: Router = new Routes(httpErrorHandler, applicationController, usersController, assets)
For now test is very simple
class ApplicationTest extends PlaySpec with OneAppPerTest {
"Application" must {
"send 404 on a bad request" in {
route(FakeRequest(GET, "/boum")) mustBe None
}
}
}
Test ends up with error:
Could not find a suitable constructor in controllers.Application. Classes must have either one (and only one) constructor annotated with #Inject or a zero-argument
I presume I need somehow use my AppLoader instead of defualt Guice mechanisam inside ApplicationTest class, because Application controller has dependacy ( cacheApi, dbApi ...)
route method can take application as argument but how can I obtain context to manually instantiate AppLoader class ? Being newbie in Scala recommendations are most welcomed.
This example answered all of my questions:
https://github.com/playframework/play-scala-compile-di-with-tests
Using term compile time dependency injection yield much more results then manual dependency injection.
I'm trying to migrate from Play 2.4 to 2.5 avoiding deprecated stuff.
I had an abstract class Microservice from which I created some objects. Some functions of the Microservice class used play.api.libs.ws.WS to make HTTP requests and also play.Play.application.configuration to read the configuration.
Previously, all I needed was some imports like:
import play.api.libs.ws._
import play.api.Play.current
import play.api.libs.concurrent.Execution.Implicits.defaultContext
But now you should use dependency injection to use WS and also to use access the current Play application.
I have something like this (shortened):
abstract class Microservice(serviceName: String) {
// ...
protected lazy val serviceURL: String = play.Play.application.configuration.getString(s"microservice.$serviceName.url")
// ...and functions using WS.url()...
}
An object looks something like this (shortened):
object HelloWorldService extends Microservice("helloWorld") {
// ...
}
Unfortunately I don't understand how I get all the stuff (WS, configuration, ExecutionContect) into the abstract class to make it work.
I tried to change it to:
abstract class Microservice #Inject() (serviceName: String, ws: WSClient, configuration: play.api.Configuration)(implicit context: scala.concurrent.ExecutionContext) {
// ...
}
But this doesn't solve the problem, because now I have to change the object too, and I can't figure out how.
I tried to turn the object into a #Singleton class, like:
#Singleton
class HelloWorldService #Inject() (implicit ec: scala.concurrent.ExecutionContext) extends Microservice ("helloWorld", ws: WSClient, configuration: play.api.Configuration) { /* ... */ }
I tried all sorts of combinations, but I'm not getting anywhere and I feel I'm not really on the right track here.
Any ideas how I can use things like WS the proper way (not using deprecated methods) without making things so complicated?
This is more related to how Guice handles inheritance and you have to do exactly what you would do if you were not using Guice, which is declaring the parameters to the superclass and calling the super constructor at your child classes. Guice even suggest it at its docs:
Wherever possible, use constructor injection to create immutable objects. Immutable objects are simple, shareable, and can be composed.
Constructor injection has some limitations:
Subclasses must call super() with all dependencies. This makes constructor injection cumbersome, especially as the injected base class changes.
In pure Java, it will means doing something like this:
public abstract class Base {
private final Dependency dep;
public Base(Dependency dep) {
this.dep = dep;
}
}
public class Child extends Base {
private final AnotherDependency anotherDep;
public Child(Dependency dep, AnotherDependency anotherDep) {
super(dep); // guaranteeing that fields at superclass will be properly configured
this.anotherDep = anotherDep;
}
}
Dependency injection won't change that and you will just have to add the annotations to indicate how to inject the dependencies. In this case, since Base class is abstract, and then no instances of Base can be created, we may skip it and just annotate Child class:
public abstract class Base {
private final Dependency dep;
public Base(Dependency dep) {
this.dep = dep;
}
}
public class Child extends Base {
private final AnotherDependency anotherDep;
#Inject
public Child(Dependency dep, AnotherDependency anotherDep) {
super(dep); // guaranteeing that fields at superclass will be properly configured
this.anotherDep = anotherDep;
}
}
Translating to Scala, we will have something like this:
abstract class Base(dep: Dependency) {
// something else
}
class Child #Inject() (anotherDep: AnotherDependency, dep: Dependency) extends Base(dep) {
// something else
}
Now, we can rewrite your code to use this knowledge and avoid deprecated APIs:
abstract class Microservice(serviceName: String, configuration: Configuration, ws: WSClient) {
protected lazy val serviceURL: String = configuration.getString(s"microservice.$serviceName.url")
// ...and functions using the injected WSClient...
}
// a class instead of an object
// annotated as a Singleton
#Singleton
class HelloWorldService(configuration: Configuration, ws: WSClient)
extends Microservice("helloWorld", configuration, ws) {
// ...
}
The last point is the implicit ExecutionContext and here we have two options:
Use the default execution context, which will be play.api.libs.concurrent.Execution.Implicits.defaultContext
Use other thread pools
This depends on you, but you can easily inject an ActorSystem to lookup the dispatcher. If you decide to go with a custom thread pool, you can do something like this:
abstract class Microservice(serviceName: String, configuration: Configuration, ws: WSClient, actorSystem: ActorSystem) {
// this will be available here and at the subclass too
implicit val executionContext = actorSystem.dispatchers.lookup("my-context")
protected lazy val serviceURL: String = configuration.getString(s"microservice.$serviceName.url")
// ...and functions using the injected WSClient...
}
// a class instead of an object
// annotated as a Singleton
#Singleton
class HelloWorldService(configuration: Configuration, ws: WSClient, actorSystem: ActorSystem)
extends Microservice("helloWorld", configuration, ws, actorSystem) {
// ...
}
How to use HelloWorldService?
Now, there are two things you need to understand in order to proper inject an instance of HelloWorldService where you need it.
From where HelloWorldService gets its dependencies?
Guice docs has a good explanation about it:
Dependency Injection
Like the factory, dependency injection is just a design pattern. The core principle is to separate behaviour from dependency resolution.
The dependency injection pattern leads to code that's modular and testable, and Guice makes it easy to write. To use Guice, we first need to tell it how to map our interfaces to their implementations. This configuration is done in a Guice module, which is any Java class that implements the Module interface.
And then, Playframework declare modules for WSClient and for Configuration. Both modules gives Guice enough information about how to build these dependencies, and there are modules to describe how to build the dependencies necessary for WSClient and Configuration. Again, Guice docs has a good explanation about it:
With dependency injection, objects accept dependencies in their constructors. To construct an object, you first build its dependencies. But to build each dependency, you need its dependencies, and so on. So when you build an object, you really need to build an object graph.
In our case, for HelloWorldService, we are using constructor injection to enable Guice to set/create our object graph.
How HelloWorldService is injected?
Just like WSClient has a module to describe how an implementation is binded to an interface/trait, we can do the same for HelloWorldService. Play docs has a clear explanation about how to create and configure modules, so I won't repeat it here.
But after creating an module, to inject a HelloWorldService to your controller, you just declare it as a dependency:
class MyController #Inject() (service: Microservice) extends Controller {
def index = Action {
// access "service" here and do whatever you want
}
}
In scala,
-> If you do not want to explicitly forward all the injected parameters to the base constructor, you can do it like that :
abstract class Base {
val depOne: DependencyOne
val depTwo: DependencyTwo
// ...
}
case class Child #Inject() (param1: Int,
depOne: DependencyOne,
depTwo: DependencyTwo) extends Base {
// ...
}