I'm currently using SOA, I've a bunch of Service, (ArticleService, CommentService, UserService, etc..)
I also have a ConfigurationService which is filled from an XML configuration file.
I'm using Zend Framework.
THis configuration service is needed in some of my service, and I'm using dependency injection, is it a good practice, to add ConfigurationService in constructor of most my Service to be able to fetch global configuration?
Thank you for your feedbacks.
I would say, no, don't pass the config container - neither as a service nor as an array nor a Zend_Config instance - in the constructor of your other services. I would keep the injection (whether by constructor or by setter) for those services focused on the actual objects/collaborators/data they actually need.
So, for example, an ArticleService might depend upon an ArticleRepository interface/object or on an ArticleMapper or on a db adapter. Let the constructor/setter signatures for the ArticleService reflect what it truly needs.
Instead, what I would do is during Bootstrap, create some kind of factory object - perhaps as an application resource - that accepts in its constructor your config data/object/service (or even better, the bootstrap instance itself, from which you could get, not just your config data, but also any application resources, like a db adapter, that were created during the bootstrap process). Then write methods on your factory object that create/deliver the other services you need. Internally, the factory maintains a registry of already created services so that it can lazy-create instances where required.
A snippet of what I have in mind might be as follows:
Bootstrap snippet:
class Bootstrap extends Zend_Application_Bootstrap_Bootstrap
{
protected function _initFactory()
{
$factory = new My_Factory($this);
return $factory;
}
}
Then the factory:
class My_Factory
{
protected $_registry;
protected $_bootstrap;
public function __constructor($bootstrap)
{
$this->_bootstrap = $bootstrap;
}
public function getDbAdapter()
{
if (!isset($this->_registry['dbAdapter']){
$this->_bootstrap->bootstrap('db'); // probably using app resource
$this->_registry['dbAdapter'] = $This->_bootstrap->getResource('db');
}
return $this->_registry['dbAdapter'];
}
public function getArticleService()
{
if (!isset($this->_registry['articleService']){
$dbAdapter = $this->getDbAdapter();
$this->_registry['articleService'] = new My_ArticleService($dbAdapter);
}
return $this->_registry['articleService'];
}
public function getTwitterService()
{
if (!isset($this->_registry['twitterService']){
$options = $this->_bootstrap->getOptions();
$user = $options['twitter']['user'];
$pass = $options['twitter']['pass'];
$this->_registry['twitterService'] = new My_TwitterService($user, $pass);
}
return $this->_registry['twitterService'];
}
}
Then in a controller, you could grab an ArticleService instance:
class SomeController extends Zend_Controller_Action
{
protected $_factory;
public function init()
{
$this->_factory = $this->getInvokeArg('bootstrap')->getResource('factory');
}
public function someAction()
{
$articleService = $this->_factory->getArticleService();
$this->view->articles = $articleService->getRecentArticles(5); // for example
}
}
The upshot here is that each service explicitly identifies the collaborators it needs and the factory is a single place that takes care of creating/injecting all those collaborators.
Finally, I confess that I am just spitballing here. To me, this is essentially a rudimentary dependency injection container; in that sense, using a fully-featured DIC - perhaps the Symfony DIC or the new Zend\Di package in ZF2 - might be better. But after many months of struggling with all the best-practice recommendations to inject your dependencies, this is what I have come up with. If it's goofy or just plain wrong, please (please!) straighten me out. ;-)
Related
According to https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-functions/functions-dotnet-dependency-injection the service provider should not be used until AFTER the startup has completed running. Indeed, if I try to get a registered service it will fail.
Example:
[assembly: FunctionsStartup(typeof(Startup))]
namespace Fx {
public sealed class Startup : FunctionsStartup {
public override void Configure(IFunctionsHostBuilder builder) {
var configurationBuilder = new ConfigurationBuilder();
configurationBuilder.AddEnvironmentVariables();
var configuration = configurationBuilder.Build();
builder.Services.AddInfrastructure(configuration);
builder.Services.AddApplication();
var serviceProvider = builder.Services.BuildServiceProvider();
DependencyInjection.AddDatabase(serviceProvider).GetAwaiter().GetResult();
}
}
}
public static class DependencyInjection {
public static async Task AddDatabase(IServiceProvider services) {
using var scope = services.CreateScope();
var serviceProvider = scope.ServiceProvider;
var context = serviceProvider.GetRequiredService<ApplicationDbContext>();
//Error generated here
if (context.Database.IsSqlServer()) {
await context.Database.MigrateAsync();
}
await ApplicationDbContextSeed.SeedSamplePersonnelDataAsync(context);
}
public static IServiceCollection AddInfrastructure(
this IServiceCollection services,
IConfiguration configuration) {
services.AddDbContext<ApplicationDbContext>(options =>
options.UseSqlServer(configuration.GetConnectionString("DefaultConnection"),
b => b.MigrationsAssembly(typeof(ApplicationDbContext).Assembly.FullName)));
services.AddScoped<IApplicationDbContext>(provider => provider.GetService<ApplicationDbContext>());
return services;
}
}
This produces the following error
Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore: No database provider has been configured for this DbContext. A provider can be configured by overriding the DbContext.OnConfiguring method or by using AddDbContext on the application service provider. If AddDbContext is used, then also ensure that your DbContext type accepts a DbContextOptions<TContext> object in its constructor and passes it to the base constructor for DbContext.
Is there a good option for migrating and seeding during startup?
The easiest way I found to run code after startup was by registering a custom IWebJobsStartup by using the WebJobsStartupAttribute (the FunctionsStartupAttribute actually also inherits from this attribute). In the WebJobsStartup class you'll need to register your extension using the AddExtension where you are able to use dependency injection and seed your database. My code:
[assembly: WebJobsStartup(typeof(DbInitializationService), "DbSeeder")]
namespace Our.Database.Seeder
{
public class DbInitializationService : IWebJobsStartup
{
public void Configure(IWebJobsBuilder builder)
{
builder.AddExtension<DbSeedConfigProvider>();
}
}
[Extension("DbSeed")]
internal class DbSeedConfigProvider : IExtensionConfigProvider
{
private readonly IServiceScopeFactory _scopeFactory;
public DbSeedConfigProvider(IServiceScopeFactory scopeFactory)
{
_scopeFactory = scopeFactory;
}
public void Initialize(ExtensionConfigContext context)
{
using var scope = _scopeFactory.CreateScope();
var dbContext = scope.ServiceProvider.GetService<YourDbContext>();
dbContext.Database.EnsureCreated();
// Further DB seeding, etc.
}
}
}
According to your code, I assume that you're building something aligned to the CleanArchitecture Repository on Github. https://github.com/jasontaylordev/CleanArchitecture
The main difference between this repo and your apporach, is that you're obviously not using ASP.NET, which is not a problem at all, but requires a little bit more configuration work.
The article already mentioned (https://markheath.net/post/ef-core-di-azure-functions) refers another blogpost (https://dev.to/azure/using-entity-framework-with-azure-functions-50aa), which briefly explains that EntityFramework Migrations are not capable of auto-discovering your migrations in an Azure Function. Therefore, you need to implement an instance of IDesignTimeDbContextFactory. I also stumbled upon it in the microsoft docs:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/ef/core/cli/dbcontext-creation?tabs=dotnet-core-cli#from-a-design-time-factory
You could for example place it inside your Infrastructure\Persistence\Configurations folder. (Once again, I'm only assuming that you're following the CleanArchitecture repo structure)
DI in AZURE Functions
Caveats
A series of registration steps run before and after the runtime processes the startup class. Therefore, keep in mind the following items:
The startup class is meant for only setup and registration. Avoid using services registered at startup during the startup process. For instance, don't try to log a message in a logger that is being registered during startup. This point of the registration process is too early for your services to be available for use. After the Configure method is run, the Functions runtime continues to register additional dependencies, which can affect how your services operate.
The dependency injection container only holds explicitly registered types. The only services available as injectable types are what are setup in the Configure method. As a result, Functions-specific types like BindingContext and ExecutionContext aren't available during setup or as injectable types
I am struggling to find a way to inject a service into an class object in angular2.
* NOTE: This is not a component, just a class. *
export class Product {
id: number;
name: string;
manufacturer: string;
constructor(product: any) {
this.id = product.id;
this.name = product.name;
this.manufacturer = product.manufacturer;
}
The only solution I have come up with is to pass the service reference to the constructor whenever I create a new product... ie: instead of new Product(product) I would do new Product(product, productService) . This seems tedious and error prone. I would rather import the reference from the class and not messy up the constructor.
I have tried the ReflectiveInjector:
let injector = ReflectiveInjector.resolveAndCreate([ProductService]);
this.productService = injector.get(ProductService);
However, this creates an error No provider for Http! (ProductService -> Http) at NoProviderError.BaseError [as constructor] (Also I'm pretty sure this creates a new productService when I simple want to reference my singleton that is instantiated at the app level).
If anyone knows of a working solution I would be glad to hear it. For now i will pass the reference through the constructor.
Thanks
I was struggling with a similar issue, and what I ended up doing, was making the service a singleton as well as an Angular injectable.
This way you can inject via DI into Angular classes and call the static getInstance() method to get the singleton instance of the class.
Something like this:
import {Injectable} from "#angular/core";
#Injectable()
export class MyService {
static instance: MyService;
static getInstance() {
if (MyService.instance) {
return MyService.instance;
}
MyService.instance = new MyService();
return MyService.instance;
}
constructor() {
if (!MyService.instance) {
MyService.instance = this;
}
return MyService.instance;
}
}
There is no way to inject a service into a plain class. Angular DI only injects into components, directives, services, and pipes - only classes where DI creates the instance, because this is when injection happens.
To get Http from a custom injector, you need to add to it's providers like shown in Inject Http manually in angular 2
or you pass a parent injector that provides them
// constructor of a class instantiated by Angulars DI
constructor(parentInjector:Injector){
let injector = ReflectiveInjector.resolveAndCreate([ProductService]);
this.productService = injector.get(ProductService, parentInjector);
}
See also https://angular.io/docs/ts/latest/api/core/index/ReflectiveInjector-class.html
If you want to have another middleware/object in a middleware
you have to use a factory like
namespace App\Somnething;
use Interop\Container\ContainerInterface;
class MyMiddlewareFactory
{
public function __invoke(ContainerInterface $container, $requestedName)
{
return new $requestedName(
$container->get(\App\Path\To\My\Middleware::class)
);
}
}
So MyMiddleware would have been injected with \App\Path\To\My\Middleware and we would be able to access it.
Question:
would it be wrong to inject the middleware with the app itself or the container? Like:
namespace App\Somnething;
use Interop\Container\ContainerInterface;
use Zend\Expressive\Application;
class MyMiddlewareFactory
{
public function __invoke(ContainerInterface $container, $requestedName)
{
return new $requestedName(
$container->get(Application::class)
);
}
}
This way it would be possible to get anything ~on the fly.
Like
namespace App\Somnething;
use Zend\Expressive\Application;
class MyMiddleware
{
/** #var Application $app */
protected $app;
public function __construct(Application $app)
{
$this->app = $app;
}
public function __invoke($some, $thing)
{
if ($some and $thing) {
$ever = $this->app
->getContainer()
->get(\Path\To\What\Ever::class);
$ever->doSome();
}
}
}
You don't inject middleware into other middleware. You inject dependencies like services or repositories. Each middleware takes care of a specifc task like authentication, authorization, localization negotiation, etc. They are executed one after the other. They mess around with the request and pass the request to the next middleware. Once the middleware stack has been exhausted, the response is returned all the way back through all the middleware in reverse order until it finally reaches the outer layer which displays the output. You can find a flow overview in the expressive docs.
I wouldn't advice to inject the container and certainly not the app itself. Although it might be easy during development, your application becomes untestable. If you inject only the services that are needed into a middleware, action or service you can easily mock those during tests. After a while you get used to writing factories where needed and it goes pretty fast.
The same goes for injecting the entity manager (if you use doctrine). It's easier to test an application if you only inject the needed repositories, which you can easily mock.
Having said this, if you are looking for an easy way to inject dependencies, zend-servicemanager can do that. Take a look at abstract factories. With an abstract factory you can create one factory for all your action classes:
<?php
namespace App\Action;
use Interop\Container\ContainerInterface;
use ReflectionClass;
use Zend\ServiceManager\Factory\AbstractFactoryInterface;
class AbstractActionFactory implements AbstractFactoryInterface
{
public function __invoke(ContainerInterface $container, $requestedName, array $options = null)
{
// Construct a new ReflectionClass object for the requested action
$reflection = new ReflectionClass($requestedName);
// Get the constructor
$constructor = $reflection->getConstructor();
if (is_null($constructor)) {
// There is no constructor, just return a new class
return new $requestedName;
}
// Get the parameters
$parameters = $constructor->getParameters();
$dependencies = [];
foreach ($parameters as $parameter) {
// Get the parameter class
$class = $parameter->getClass();
// Get the class from the container
$dependencies[] = $container->get($class->getName());
}
// Return the requested class and inject its dependencies
return $reflection->newInstanceArgs($dependencies);
}
public function canCreate(ContainerInterface $container, $requestedName)
{
// Only accept Action classes
if (substr($requestedName, -6) == 'Action') {
return true;
}
return false;
}
}
I wrote a blog post about that.
At the end of the day it's your own decision, but best practice is not injecting the app, container or the entity manager. It will make your life easier if you need to debug your middleware and / or write tests for it.
Injecting the application or container in your middleware is possible but it is not good idea at all:
1) Inversion Of Control (IoC)
It violated the inversion of control principle, your class must not have any knowledge about the IoC container.
2) Dependency Inversion Principle (DIP)
Dependency inversion principle states that "high-level modules should not depend on low-level modules", so your higher level middleware class depends on the infrastructure/framework.
3) Law of Demeter (LoD)
According to the law of demeter, the unit should have limited knowledge about other units, it should know only about its closely related units.
The MyMiddleware::class has too much knowledge other units, first of all, it knows about the Application::class, then it knows that the Application knows about the Container, then it knows that the Container knows about the What\Ever::class and so on.
This kind of code violates some of the most important OOP principles, leads to horrible coupling with the framework, it has implicit dependencies and least but not last, it is hard to be read and understood.
I have this code in my controller, it takes 'procedure_type' from the request and checks to see if a ProcedureType with that name exists. If it does it uses the object, if not it creates a new ProcedureType, then return the new object to use.
// Check the typed in ProcedureType against existing types.
$procedureTypes = $entityManager->getRepository('IncompassSurgeryBundle:ProcedureType')->findBy(array('name' => $request->request->get('procedure_type'), 'vendor' => $vendorId));
if (empty($procedureTypes)) {
// Create Procedure Type
$procedureType = new ProcedureType();
$procedureType->setVendor($vendor)
->setName($request->request->get('procedure_type'))
->setCreated(new \DateTime())
->setUpdated($procedureType->getCreated());
$entityManager->persist($procedureType);
} else {
$procedureType = $procedureTypes[0];
}
I don't think this is the best way to do this, I'd like to move the code into a function, say checkProcedureType(), but I don't know where the best place is to put that. I don't think it could go in the Entity or Repository classes, and moving it to a private function in the controller doesn't feel right.
I'm sure there is a class type that I'm not aware of, that extends the Entity. Or maybe I should just put these functions in my entity classes.
Service are the answer to almost everything in Symfony 2. Create a service like this :
namespace Your\Bundle\Service;
class ProcedureService // Call this the way you want
{
protected $entityManager;
public function __construct($entityManager)
{
$this->entityManager = $entityManager;
}
public function callMeTheWayYouWant($vendorId, $vendor)
{
// Check the typed in ProcedureType against existing types.
$procedureTypes = $this->entityManager->getRepository('IncompassSurgeryBundle:ProcedureType')->findBy(array('name' => $request->request->get('procedure_type'), 'vendor' => $vendorId));
if (empty($procedureTypes)) {
// Create Procedure Type
$procedureType = new ProcedureType();
$procedureType->setVendor($vendor)
->setName($request->request->get('procedure_type'))
->setCreated(new \DateTime())
->setUpdated($procedureType->getCreated());
$this->entityManager->persist($procedureType);
} else {
$procedureType = $procedureTypes[0];
}
// The rest of your code
}
}
In your services.yml file :
your_service:
class: Your\Bundle\Service\ProcedureService
arguments: [#doctrine.orm.entity_manager]
Then use it in your controller :
$this->get('your_service')->callMeTheWayYouWant($vendorId, $vendor);
If logic is somehow related to acessing database I always go for repository. However, if cases like yours, I tend to analyze it's dependency map.
Does your code repeats in some other method within same class, only?
If so, go for private method.
Is this part of code reused somewhere else but does not rely on some services?
You could externalize logic by creating separate class and static method which executes the code. Beware: Tends to get messy really quick
Finally, does your code rely on services/configuration?
Create a separate service, inject the services/configuration and invoke it's method. Adds a bit of overhead, if your abuse it, but you should be fine
Personally, in your example, I would go for private method, but that's just my opinion.
In my app, I was testing Google Directions API with ajax, but since I was just testing all the logic was in the routes.php file. Now I want to do things the proper way and have three layers: route, controller and service.
So in the routes I tell Laravel which method should be executed:
Route::get('/search', 'DirectionsAPIController#search');
And the method just returns what the service is supposed to return:
class DirectionsAPIController extends BaseController {
public function search() {
$directionsSearchService = new DirectionsSearchService();
return $directionsSearchService->search(Input::all());
}
}
I created the service in app/libraries/Services/Directions and called it DirectionsSearchService.php and copied all the logic I developed in routes:
class DirectionsSearchService {
public function search($input = array()) {
$origin = $input['origin'];
$destination = $input['destination'];
$mode = $input['mode'];
// do stuf...
return $data;
}
}
I read the docs and some place else (and this too) and did what I was supposed to do to register a service:
class DirectionsAPIController extends BaseController {
public function search() {
App::register('libraries\Services\Directions\DirectionsSearchService');
$directionsSearchService = new DirectionsSearchService();
return $directionsSearchService->search(Input::all());
}
}
// app/libraries/Services/Directions/DirectionsSearchService.php
use Illuminate\Support\ServiceProvider;
class DirectionsSearchService extends ServiceProvider {
}
I also tried adding libraries\Services\Directions\DirectionsSearchService to the providers array in app/config/app.php.
However, I am getting this error:
HP Fatal error: Class
'libraries\Services\Directions\DirectionsSearchService' not found in
/home/user/www/my-app-laravel/bootstrap/compiled.php on line 549
What am I doing wrong? And what is the usual way to use your own services? I don't want to place all the logic in the controller...
2 main things that you are missing:
There is a difference between a ServiceProvider and your class. A service provider in Laravel tells Laravel where to go look for the service, but it does not contain the service logic itself. So DirectionsSearchService should not be both, imho.
You need to register your classes with composer.json so that autoloader knows that your class exists.
To keep it simple I'll go with Laravel IoC's automatic resolution and not using a service provider for now.
app/libraries/Services/Directions/DirectionsSearchService.php:
namespace Services\Directions;
class DirectionsSearchService
{
public function search($input = array())
{
// Your search logic
}
}
You might notice that DirectionsSearchService does not extend anything. Your service becomes very loosely coupled.
And in your DirectionsAPIController.php you do:
class DirectionsAPIController extends BaseController
{
protected $directionsSearchService;
public function __construct(Services\Directions\DirectionsSearchService $directionsSearchService)
{
$this->directionsSearchService = $directionsSearchService;
}
public function search()
{
return $this->directionsSearchService->search(Input::all());
}
}
With the code above, when Laravel tries to __construct() your controller, it will look for Services\Directions\DirectionsSearchService and injects into the controller for you automatically. In the constructor, we simply need to set it to an instance variable so your search() can use it when needed.
The second thing that you are missing is to register your classes with composer's autoload. Do this by adding to composer.json's autoload section:
"autoload": {
"classmap": [
... // Laravel's default classmap autoloads
],
"psr-4": {
"Services\\": "app/libraries/Services"
}
}
And do a composer dump-autoload after making changes to composer.json. And your code should be working again.
The suggestion above can also be better with a service provider and coding to the interface. It would make it easier to control what to inject into your controller, and hence easier to create and inject in a mock for testing.
It involves quite a few more steps so I won't mention that here, but you can read more in Exploring Laravel’s IoC container and Laravel 4 Controller Testing.