We Keep Coding

How to create private dependency method setup using Moq

I have the following Controller interface:
public interface IInformationController
{
string GetStoredInformation();
string GetInformation();
}
The controller class is the following:
public class InformationController : ControllerBase, IInformationController
{
private InformationProvider1 InformationProvider1;
private InformationProvider2 InformationProvider2;
private IBasicRepository repository;
public InformationController(IBasicRepository basicRepository)
=> repository = basicRepository;
public string GetStoredInformation()
=> repository.GetStoredInformation();
public string GetInformation()
=> $"Information is {informationProvider1.GetInformationHeader()}, Information detail is {informationProvider2.GetInformationDetail()}";
}
I intend to create a unit test for the InformationController with xUnit and Moq.
This is my test class:
public class InformationControllerTest
{
public InformationControllerTest()
{
repositoryMock = new Mock<IBasicRepository>();
repositoryMock.Setup(repository => repository.GetStoredInformation()).Returns("Stored information");
SUT = new InformationController(repositoryMock.Object);
}
[Fact]
public void GetStoredInformation_Returns_Stored_Information()
{
string result = SUT.GetStoredInformation();
Assert.Equal("Stored information", result);
}
[Fact]
public void GetInformation_Returns_Valid_Information()
{
string result = SUT.GetInformation(); //TODO: how to avoid the usage of actual provider implementations?
Assert.Equal("Information is Header1, Information detail is Detail1", result);
}
}
As you can see, there are private providers. Unfortunately they are external dependencies and can't easily be introduced via dependency injection.
How should I mock their actual calls? Should I mock the controller method (which imho should invalidate the process of testing the actual controller)? Should I try to get them via dependency injection?

The unit test is exposing the short comings of your current design, which is tightly coupling to external dependencies or implementation concerns.
Dependencies should be explicitly injected into their dependents
Methods and classes should explicitly require (typically through method parameters or constructor parameters) any collaborating objects they need in order to function correctly.
Reference Explicit Dependencies Principle
public class InformationController : ControllerBase, IInformationController {
private IInformationProvider1 informationProvider1;
private IInformationProvider2 informationProvider2;
private IBasicRepository repository;
public InformationController(IBasicRepository basicRepository,
IInformationProvider1 informationProvider1,
IInformationProvider2 informationProvider2) {
repository = basicRepository;
this.informationProvider1 = informationProvider1;
this.informationProvider2 = informationProvider2
}
public string GetStoredInformation()
=> repository.GetStoredInformation();
public string GetInformation()
=> $"Information is {informationProvider1.GetInformationHeader()}, Information detail is {informationProvider2.GetInformationDetail()}";
//...
}
Create abstractions and implementations for those external dependencies, then register them with the DI container so that they can be resolved and properly provided to the controller at run-time. This will now allow them to also be tested in isolation without undesired side effects from their actual implementations.

Determining which implementation to inject at runtime using .NET Core dependency injection

I have three types of users in my application, let's say Type1, Type2 and Type3.
Then i want to create one service implementation for each type, let's say i have a service to get photos, i would have three services : Type1PhotosService, Type2PhotosService and Type3PhotosService, each of them implementing IPhotosService.
In the web api, i would inject IPhotosService :
IPhotosService _service;
public PhotosController(IPhotosService service){
_service = service;
}
The web api uses token authentication with claims. So what i want to achieve, is for each user, depending on the claim he has : type1 or type2 or type3, the correct implementation of the service will be automatically injected rather than injecting a single service in the startup file.
What i want to avoid, is having one service, with a bunch of switch and if statements to return the correct data depending on user type and the roles he has.
EDIT:
some comments were wondering what's the point of three implementations, so here are more details to give it a little more sense.
The service is a job finder service, and the application has three different profiles : candidate, employer and administration. Each of these profiles need a proper implementation. So rather than having three methods GetCandidateJobs, GetEmployerJobs and GetAdministrationJobs inside the same service and switch on the user type, i preferred to have one implementation per profile type, then depending on the profile type, use the correct implementation.

Without Using a Separate IoC Container
Here's an approach that's way easier than configuring your app to use another IoC container and then configuring that container. After working through this with Windsor this solution seems a whole lot easier.
This approach is simplest if you can use a singleton instance of each service implementation.
We'll start with an interface, some implementations, and the factory we can inject which will return an implementation selected at runtime based on some input.
public interface ICustomService { }
public class CustomServiceOne : ICustomService { }
public class CustomServiceTwo : ICustomService { }
public class CustomServiceThree : ICustomService { }
public interface ICustomServiceFactory
{
ICustomService Create(string input);
}
Here's a really crude implementation of the factory. (Didn't use string constants, or polish it at all.)
public class CustomServiceFactory : ICustomServiceFactory
{
private readonly Dictionary<string, ICustomService> _services
= new Dictionary<string, ICustomService>(StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase);
public CustomServiceFactory(IServiceProvider serviceProvider)
{
_services.Add("TypeOne", serviceProvider.GetService<CustomServiceOne>());
_services.Add("TypeTwo", serviceProvider.GetService<CustomServiceTwo>());
_services.Add("TypeThree", serviceProvider.GetService<CustomServiceThree>());
}
public ICustomService Create(string input)
{
return _services.ContainsKey(input) ? _services[input] : _services["TypeOne"];
}
}
This assumes that you've already registered CustomServiceOne, CustomServiceTwo, etc. with the IServiceCollection. They would not be registered as interface implementations, since that's not how we're resolving them. This class will simply resolve each one and put them in a dictionary so that you can retrieve them by name.
In this case the factory method takes a string, but you could inspect any type or multiple arguments to determine which implementation to return. Even the use of a string as the dictionary key is arbitrary. And, just as an example, I provided fallback behavior to return some default implementation. It might make more sense to throw an exception instead if you can't determine the right implementation to return.
Another alternative, depending on your needs, would be to resolve the implementation within the factory when it's requested. To the extent possible I try to keep most classes stateless so that I can resolve and reuse a single instance.
To register the factory with the IServiceCollection at startup we would do this:
services.AddSingleton<ICustomServiceFactory>(provider =>
new CustomServiceFactory(provider));
The IServiceProvider will be injected into the factory when the factory is resolved, and then the factory will use it to resolve the service.
Here's the corresponding unit tests. The test method is the identical to the one used in the Windsor answer, which "proves" that we can transparently replace one factory implementation with another and change other stuff in the composition root without breaking stuff.
public class Tests
{
private IServiceProvider _serviceProvider;
[SetUp]
public void Setup()
{
var services = new ServiceCollection();
services.AddSingleton<CustomServiceOne>();
services.AddSingleton<CustomServiceTwo>();
services.AddSingleton<CustomServiceThree>();
services.AddSingleton<ICustomServiceFactory>(provider =>
new CustomServiceFactory(provider));
_serviceProvider = services.BuildServiceProvider();
}
[TestCase("TypeOne", typeof(CustomServiceOne))]
[TestCase("TypeTwo", typeof(CustomServiceTwo))]
[TestCase("TYPEThree", typeof(CustomServiceThree))]
[TestCase("unknown", typeof(CustomServiceOne))]
public void FactoryReturnsExpectedService(string input, Type expectedType)
{
var factory = _serviceProvider.GetService<ICustomServiceFactory>();
var service = factory.Create(input);
Assert.IsInstanceOf(expectedType, service);
}
}
As in the Windsor example, this is written to avoid any reference to the container outside of the composition root. If a class depends on ICustomServiceFactory and ICustomService you could switch between this implementation, the Windsor implementation, or any other implementation of the factory.

Using Windsor
I'm going to sidestep the questions about whether or not this makes sense in this case and just attempt to answer the question as asked:
.NET Core's IoC container isn't built particularly well for this sort of scenario. (They acknowledge this in their documentation.) You can work around it by adding another IoC container like Windsor.
The implementation ended up looking way more complicated than I would have liked, but once you get past the setup it's not bad and you get access to Windsor's features. I'm going to provide another answer that doesn't include Windsor. I had to do all of this work to see that I probably like the other approach better.
In your project, add the Castle.Windsor.MsDependencyInjection NuGet package.
Interfaces and Implementations for Testing
For testing, I added some interfaces and implementations:
public interface ICustomService { }
public interface IRegisteredWithServiceCollection { }
public class CustomServiceOne : ICustomService { }
public class CustomServiceTwo : ICustomService { }
public class CustomServiceThree : ICustomService { }
public class RegisteredWithServiceCollection : IRegisteredWithServiceCollection { }
The intent is to create a factory that will select and return an implementation of ICustomService using some runtime input.
Here's an interface which will serve as a factory. This is what we can inject into a class and call at runtime to get an implementation of ICustomService:
public interface ICustomServiceFactory
{
ICustomService Create(string input);
}
Configure the Windsor Container
Next is a class which will configure an IWindsorContainer to resolve dependencies:
public class WindsorConfiguration : IWindsorInstaller
{
public void Install(IWindsorContainer container, IConfigurationStore store)
{
container.AddFacility<TypedFactoryFacility>();
container.Register(
Component.For<ICustomService, CustomServiceOne>().Named("TypeOne"),
Component.For<ICustomService, CustomServiceTwo>().Named("TypeTwo"),
Component.For<ICustomService, CustomServiceThree>().Named("TypeThree"),
Component.For<ICustomService, CustomServiceOne>().IsDefault(),
Component.For<ICustomServiceFactory>().AsFactory(new CustomServiceSelector())
);
}
}
public class CustomServiceSelector : DefaultTypedFactoryComponentSelector
{
public CustomServiceSelector()
: base(fallbackToResolveByTypeIfNameNotFound: true) { }
protected override string GetComponentName(MethodInfo method, object[] arguments)
{
return (string) arguments[0];
}
}
Here's what's going on in here:
The TypedFactoryFacility will enable us to use Windsor's typed factories. It will create an implementation of our factory interface for us.
We're registering three implementations of ICustomService. Because we're registering more than one implementation, each must have a name. When we resolve ICustomService we can specify a name, and it will resolve the type according to that string.
For illustration I registered another implementation of ICustomService without a name. That will enable us to resolve a default implementation if we try to resolve using an unrecognized name. (Some alternatives are just throwing an exception, or returning a "null" instance of ICustomService or creating a class like UnknownCustomService that throws an exception.)
Component.For<ICustomServiceFactory>().AsFactory(new CustomServiceSelector()) tells the container to create a proxy class to implement ICustomServiceFactory. (More on that in their documentation.)
CustomServiceSelector is what takes the argument passed to the factory's Create method and returns the component name (TypeOne, TypeTwo, etc.) that will be used to select a component. In this case we're expecting that the argument passed to the factory will be the same as the registration name we've used. But we could replace this with other logic. Our factory could even take arguments of other types which we could inspect and determine which string to return.
Configure Your App To Use the Windsor Container
Now, in StartUp, modify ConfigureServices to return IServiceProvider instead of void and create an IServiceProvider that combines services registered directly with the IServiceCollection with those registered with the Windsor container:
public IServiceProvider ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddMvc();
var container = new WindsorContainer();
container.Install(new WindsorConfiguration());
return WindsorRegistrationHelper.CreateServiceProvider(container, services);
}
container.Install(new WindsorConfiguration()) allows WindsorConfiguration to configure our container. We could just configure the container right in this method, but this is a nice way to keep our container configurations organized. We can create numerous IWindsorInstaller implementations or our own custom classes to configure the Windsor container.
WindsorRegistrationHelper.CreateServiceProvider(container, services) creates the IServiceProvider that uses container and services.
Does It Work?
I wouldn't post all this without finding out first. Here's some NUnit tests. (I usually write some basic tests for DI configuration.)
The setup creates an IServiceProvider similar to what would happen in the application startup. It creates a container and applies the WindsorConfiguration. I'm also registering a service directly with the ServiceCollection to make sure that the two play well together. Then I'm combining the two into an IServiceProvider.
Then I'm resolving an ICustomerServiceFactory from the IServiceProvider and verifying that it returns the correct implementation of ICustomService for each input string, including the fallback when the string isn't a recognized dependency name.
I'm also verifying that the service registered directly with ServiceCollection is resolved.
public class Tests
{
private IServiceProvider _serviceProvider;
[SetUp]
public void Setup()
{
var services = new ServiceCollection();
services.AddSingleton<IRegisteredWithServiceCollection, RegisteredWithServiceCollection>();
var container = new WindsorContainer();
container.Install(new WindsorConfiguration());
_serviceProvider = WindsorRegistrationHelper.CreateServiceProvider(container, services);
}
[TestCase("TypeOne", typeof(CustomServiceOne))]
[TestCase("TypeTwo", typeof(CustomServiceTwo))]
[TestCase("TYPEThree", typeof(CustomServiceThree))]
[TestCase("unknown", typeof(CustomServiceOne))]
public void FactoryReturnsExpectedService(string input, Type expectedType)
{
var factory = _serviceProvider.GetService<ICustomServiceFactory>();
var service = factory.Create(input);
Assert.IsInstanceOf(expectedType, service);
}
[Test]
public void ServiceProviderReturnsServiceRegisteredWithServiceCollection()
{
var service = _serviceProvider.GetService<IRegisteredWithServiceCollection>();
Assert.IsInstanceOf<RegisteredWithServiceCollection>(service);
}
}
Is All of This Worth It?
Now that I've figured it out, I'd probably use it if I really needed this sort of functionality. It looks worse if you're trying to assimilate both using Windsor with .NET Core and seeing it's abstract factory implementation for the first time. Here's another article with some more information on Windsor's abstract factory without all the noise about .NET Core.

I am going to go out on a limb here and say that the attempt to utilize dependency injection for this purpose is sub-optimal. Normally this would be handled by a Factory pattern that produces service implementations using the dreaded if and switch statements. A simple example is:
public interface IPhotoService {
Photo CreatePhoto(params);
}
public class PhotoServiceFactory {
private readonly IPhotoService _type1;
private readonly IPhotoService _type2;
private readonly IPhotoService _type3;
public PhotoServiceFactory(IDependency1 d1, IDependency2 d2, ...etc) {
_type1 = new ConcreteServiceA(d1);
_type2 = new ConcreteServiceB(d2);
_type3 = new ConcreteServiceC(etc);
}
public IPhotoService Create(User user) {
switch(user.Claim) {
case ClaimEnum.Type1:
return _type1;
case ClaimEnum.Type2:
return _type2;
case ClaimEnum.Type3:
return _type3;
default:
throw new NotImplementedException
}
}
}
Then in your controller:
public class PhotosController {
IPhotoServiceFactory _factory;
public PhotosController(IPhotoServiceFactory factory){
_factory = factory;
}
public IHttpActionResult GetPhoto() {
var photoServiceToUse = _factory.Create(User);
var photo = photoServiceToUse.CreatePhoto(params);
return Ok(photo);
}
}
Alternately just use the concrete classes as arguments in the constructor and follow a similar logic as to the above.

Here is one solution, i have created inside asp.net core console application.
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection;
namespace CreationalPattern
{
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
// Add dependency into service collection
var services = new ServiceCollection()
.AddTransient<FordFigoFactory>()
.AddTransient<AudiQ7Factory>();
/* Create CarServiceFactory as singleton because it can be used across the application more frequently*/
services.AddSingleton<ICarServiceFactory>(provider => new CarServiceFactory(provider));
// create a service provider from the service collection
var serviceProvider = services.BuildServiceProvider();
/* instantiate car*/
var factory = serviceProvider.GetService<ICarServiceFactory>();
var audiCar = factory.Create("audi").CreateACar("Blue");
Console.Read();
}
}
public interface ICarServiceFactory
{
ICreateCars Create(string input);
}
public class CarServiceFactory : ICarServiceFactory
{
private readonly Dictionary<string, ICreateCars> _services
= new Dictionary<string, ICreateCars>(StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase);
public CarServiceFactory(IServiceProvider serviceProvider)
{
_services.Add("ford", serviceProvider.GetService<FordFigoFactory>());
_services.Add("audi", serviceProvider.GetService<AudiQ7Factory>());
}
public ICreateCars Create(string input)
{
Console.WriteLine(input + " car is created.");
return _services.ContainsKey(input) ? _services[input] : _services["ford"];
}
}
public interface ICreateCars
{
Car CreateACar(string color);
}
public class FordFigoFactory : ICreateCars
{
public Car CreateACar(string color)
{
Console.WriteLine("FordFigo car is created with color:" + color);
return new Fordigo { Color = color};
}
}
public class AudiQ7Factory : ICreateCars
{
public Car CreateACar(string color)
{
Console.WriteLine("AudiQ7 car is created with color:" + color);
return new AudiQ7 { Color = color };
}
}
public abstract class Car
{
public string Model { get; set; }
public string Color { get; set; }
public string Company { get; set; }
}
public class Fordigo : Car
{
public Fordigo()
{
Model = "Figo";
Company = "Ford";
}
}
public class AudiQ7 : Car
{
public AudiQ7()
{
Model = "Audi";
Company = "Q7";
}
}
}
Explanation:
To understand better try to read the program from bottom to top. We have 3 sections:
Car (Car, Fordigo, AudiQ7)
CarFactory (ICreateCars, FordFigoFactory, AudiQ7Factory)
CarService (ICarServiceFactory, CarServiceFactory)
In this Dependency injection is registered as transient for Factory classes FordFigoFactory and AudiQ7Factory. And Singleton for CarServiceFactory.

How to do Caching and Dependency Injection outside of Controller in .NET Core MVC

I've used DI purely for tests within a controller and I'm oddly having a real hard time using it outside of a controller. I had a static caching class called caching engine, but apparently DI and static classes don't mix well, so I decided to make it non-static instead. However, I can't get this to work well and I'm not sure what the best approach is. I have a controller that I need to pass products and send them to the view. However, for speed improvements, I'd like to use memory caching, but I'm really confused on the best design here. I'd like to know the best way to do this.
1) How does instantiating a new class work with DI if you don't pass the dependencies?
2) Should I inject my memorycache and product repository into the controller and then pass them into the cachingengine constructor? That seems like a lot of unnecessary parameter passing, so I didn't like this.
3) Should I just instantiate a MemoryCache class in the caching engine and not worry about DI?
4) Should I just switch the CachingEngine back to a static class?
Thank you for your help and advice. It is much appreciated.
Here's the Startup.cs
public class Startup
{
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
//Add Dependencies
services.AddTransient<IProductRepository, ProductRepository>();
//Extention method that sets up the shared objects used in MVC apps
services.AddMvc();
services.AddMemoryCache();
....
}
}
Here's the Controller
public class MainController : Controller
{
private CachingEngine engine;
public MainController()
{
//This isn't valid, missing parameters
engine = new CachingEngine();
}
public IActionResult Index()
{
var products = CachingEngine.GetProducts();
....
}
}
And here's the caching class:
public class CachingEngine
{
private readonly IMemoryCache memoryCache;
private IProductRepository prodRepo;
public CachingEngine(IMemoryCache memory, IProductRepository rep)
{
memoryCache = memoryCache;
prodRepo = rep;
}
public List<Product> GetProducts()
{
var cacheKey = "Products";
List<Product> prods;
if (memoryCache.TryGetValue(cacheKey, out prods))
{
return prods;
}
else
{
memoryCache.Set(cacheKey, prodRepo.Products);
return prods;
}
}
}

First off, to clarify, a static class cannot be instantiated so how could you inject instantiations into its constructor using a dependency injection framework. It is not that static classes do not work well with DI, they do not work at all and make no sense in the context of dependency injection.
Your Controller needs a CachingEngine, so you need to inject it, a simple rule of setting up DI in your software: do not use the new operator.
Anytime you use the new operator you are tightly coupling your code to a particular type and you have the exact problem that Dependency Inject is trying to solve.
public class Startup
{
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
//Add Dependencies
services.AddTransient<IProductRepository, ProductRepository>();
//configure DI for IMemoryCache and CachingEngine
services.AddTransient<IMemoryCache, MyMemoryCacheClass>();
services.AddTransient<MyICachingEngineInterface, CachingEngine>();
//Extention method that sets up the shared objects used in MVC apps
services.AddMvc();
services.AddMemoryCache();
....
}
}
public class MainController : Controller
{
private readonly MyICachingEngineInterface _cachingEngine;
public MainController(MyICachingEngineInterface cachingEngine)
{
_cachingEngine = cachingEngine;
}
public IActionResult Index()
{
var products = _cachingEngine.GetProducts();
....
}
}

Dependency Injection with classes other than a Controller class

At this point I'm injecting things into my Controllers with ease, in some cases building my own ResolverServices class. Life is good.
What I cannot figure out how to do is get the framework to automatically inject into non-controller classes. What does work is having the framework automatically inject into my controller IOptions, which is effectively the configuration for my project:
public class MessageCenterController : Controller
{
private readonly MyOptions _options;
public MessageCenterController(IOptions<MyOptions> options)
{
_options = options.Value;
}
}
I'm thinking whether I can do the same for for my own classes. I assume I'm close when I mimic the controller, like this:
public class MyHelper
{
private readonly ProfileOptions _options;
public MyHelper(IOptions<ProfileOptions> options)
{
_options = options.Value;
}
public bool CheckIt()
{
return _options.SomeBoolValue;
}
}
I think where I'm failing is when I call it like this:
public void DoSomething()
{
var helper = new MyHelper(??????);
if (helper.CheckIt())
{
// Do Something
}
}
The problem I have tracking this down is practically everything that talks about DI is talking about it at the controller level. I tried hunting down where it happens in the Controller object source code, but it gets kinda crazy in there.
I do know I can manually create an instance of IOptions and pass it to the MyHelper constructor, but it seems like I should be able to get the framework do that since it works for Controllers.

Below is a working example of using DI without anything that involves MVC Controllers. This is what I needed to do to understand the process, so maybe it will help somebody else.
The ShoppingCart object gets, via DI, an instance of INotifier (which notifies the customer of their order.)
using Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection;
using System;
namespace DiSample
{
// STEP 1: Define an interface.
/// <summary>
/// Defines how a user is notified.
/// </summary>
public interface INotifier
{
void Send(string from, string to, string subject, string body);
}
// STEP 2: Implement the interface
/// <summary>
/// Implementation of INotifier that notifies users by email.
/// </summary>
public class EmailNotifier : INotifier
{
public void Send(string from, string to, string subject, string body)
{
// TODO: Connect to something that will send an email.
}
}
// STEP 3: Create a class that requires an implementation of the interface.
public class ShoppingCart
{
INotifier _notifier;
public ShoppingCart(INotifier notifier)
{
_notifier = notifier;
}
public void PlaceOrder(string customerEmail, string orderInfo)
{
_notifier.Send("admin#store.com", customerEmail, $"Order Placed", $"Thank you for your order of {orderInfo}");
}
}
public class Program
{
// STEP 4: Create console app to setup DI
static void Main(string[] args)
{
// create service collection
var serviceCollection = new ServiceCollection();
// ConfigureServices(serviceCollection)
serviceCollection.AddTransient<INotifier, EmailNotifier>();
// create service provider
var serviceProvider = serviceCollection.BuildServiceProvider();
// This is where DI magic happens:
var myCart = ActivatorUtilities.CreateInstance<ShoppingCart>(serviceProvider);
myCart.PlaceOrder("customer#home.com", "2 Widgets");
System.Console.Write("Press any key to end.");
System.Console.ReadLine();
}
}
}

Let's say MyHelper is used by MyService which in turn is used by your controller.
The way to resolve this situation is:
Register both MyService and MyHelper in Startup.ConfigureServices.
services.AddTransient<MyService>();
services.AddTransient<MyHelper>();
The controller receives an instance of MyService in its constructor.
public HomeController(MyService service) { ... }
MyService constructor will in turn receive an instance of MyHelper.
public MyService(MyHelper helper) { ... }
The DI framework will be able resolve the whole object graph without problems. If you are worried about new instances being created every time an object is resolved, you can read about the different lifetime and registration options like the singleton or request lifetimes.
You should be really suspicious when you think you have to manually create an instance of some service, as you might end up in the service locator anti-pattern. Better leave creating the objects to the DI Container. If you really find yourself in that situation (let's say you create an abstract factory), then you could use the IServiceProvider directly (Either request an IServiceProvider in your constructor or use the one exposed in the httpContext).
var foo = serviceProvider.GetRequiredService<MyHelper>();
I would recommend reading the specific documentation about the ASP.Net 5 DI framework and about dependency injection in general.

Unfortunately there is no direct way. The only way I managed to make it work is by creating a static class and using that everywhere else as below:
public static class SiteUtils
{
public static string AppName { get; set; }
public static string strConnection { get; set; }
}
Then in your startup class, fill it in as below:
public void Configure(IApplicationBuilder app, IHostingEnvironment env, ILoggerFactory loggerFactory)
{
//normal as detauls , removed for space
// set my variables all over the site
SiteUtils.strConnection = Configuration.GetConnectionString("DefaultConnection");
SiteUtils.AppName = Configuration.GetValue<string>("AppName");
}
Although this is bad pattern, as this will stay for the whole life cycle of the application and I couldn't find better way to use it outside controller.

Here's a more complete example to directly answer the OP's question, based on the current .NET Core 2.2 DI documentation here. Adding this answer since it may help someone that's new to .NET Core DI, and because this question is Google's top search result.
First, add an interface for MyHelper:
public interface IMyHelper
{
bool CheckIt();
}
Second, update the MyHelper class to implement the interface (in Visual Studio, press ctrl-. to implement the interface):
public class MyHelper : IMyHelper
{
private readonly ProfileOptions _options;
public MyHelper(IOptions<ProfileOptions> options)
{
_options = options.Value;
{
public bool CheckIt()
{
return _options.SomeBoolValue;
}
}
Third, register the interface as a framework-provided service in the DI service container. Do this by registering the IMyHelper service with the concrete type MyHelper in the ConfigureServices method in Startup.cs.
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
...
services.AddScoped<IMyHelper, MyHelper>();
...
}
Fourth, create a private variable to reference an instance of the service. Pass the service as an argument in the constructor (via constructor injection) then initialize the variable with the service instance. Reference any properties or call methods on this instance of the custom class via the private variable.
public class MessageCenterController : Controller
{
private readonly MyOptions _options;
private readonly IMyHelper _myHelper;
public MessageCenterController(
IOptions<MyOptions> options,
IMyHelper myHelper
)
{
_options = options.value;
_myHelper = myHelper;
}
public void DoSomething()
{
if (_myHelper.CheckIt())
{
// Do Something
}
}
}

You may use Activator.CreateInstance(). Here is a wrapper function for it. The way you use this is as follows.
var determinedProgrammatically = "My.NameSpace.DemoClass1"; // implements IDemo interface
var obj = CreateInstance<My.NameSpace.IDemo, string>(determinedProgrammatically, "This goes into the parameter of the constructor.", "Omit this parameter if your class lives in the current assembly");
Now you have an instance of obj which is instantiated from type determined programmatically. This obj can be injected into non controller classes.
public TInterface CreateInstance<TInterface, TParameter>(string typeName, TParameter constructorParam, string dllName = null)
{
var type = dllName == null ? System.Type.GetType(typeName) :
System.AppDomain.CurrentDomain.GetAssemblies().FirstOrDefault(a => a.FullName.StartsWith(dllName, System.StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase)).GetType(typeName);
return (TInterface)System.Activator.CreateInstance(type, constructorParam);
}
PS: You may iterate through System.AppDomain.CurrentDomain.GetAssemblies() to determine the name of the assembly that houses your class. This name is used in the 3rd parameter of the wrapper function.

TL;DR: You can save a singleton in a static var and then access it form other classes, but this an anti-pattern, use with caution.
Long version:
As per this question Resolving instances with ASP.NET Core DI from within ConfigureServices
Any services registered in ConfigureServices() can then be injected
into the Configure() method
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddSingleton<FooService>();
}
public void Configure(IApplicationBuilder app, FooService fooService)
{
FooServiceInstance = fooService;
}
public static FooService FooServiceInstance { get; private set; }
And then call it from your other code MyStartupClass.FooService.DoStuff()

What is Ninject and when do you use it?

I have been helping a few friends on a project and there is a class that uses Ninject. I am fairly new to C# and I have no idea what that class is doing, which is why I need to understand Ninject. Can anyone explain what Ninject is and when does one use it(with example if possible)? Or if you can point to some links that would be great too.
I tried this question: Ninject tutorials/documentations? but it didn't really help a beginner like me.

Ninject is dependency injector for .NET, practical realisation of pattern Dependency Injection (form of Inversion of Control pattern).
Suppose you have two classes DbRepository and Controller:
class Controller {
private DbRepository _repository;
// ... some methods that uses _repository
}
class DbRepository {
// ... some bussiness logic here ...
}
So, now you have two problems:
You must initialize _repository to use it. You have several options for doing this:
Manually, within the constructor. But what if the constructor of DbRepository changes? You would need to rewrite your Controller class because code it's dependent upon was changed. It's not hard if you have only one Controller, but if you have a couple of classes that have a dependency on your Repository you have a real problem.
You can use a service locator or factory. But now you have a dependency on your service locator. You have a global service locator and all code must use it. How you will you change the behavior of your service locator when you need to use it in one part of your code for activation logic but for something else in another part of your code? There is only one way - passing the service locator through constructors. But with more and more classes you will need to pass it more and more times. Anyway, it's a good thought but in the long run, it's a bad idea.
class Controller {
private DbRepository _repository;
public Controller() {
_repository = GlobalServiceLocator.Get<DbRepository>()
}
// ... some methods that uses _repository
}
You can use dependency injection. Look at the code:
class Controller {
private IRepository _repository;
public Controller(IRepository repository) {
_repository = repository;
}
}
Now when you need your controller you write: ninjectDevKernel.Get<Controller>(); or ninjectTestKernel.Get<Controller>();. You can switch beetween dependency resolvers as fast as you want. See? It's simple, you don't need to write a lot.
You can't create unit tests for it. Your Controller has a dependency on DbRepository and if you want to test some method that uses repository, your code will go to the database and ask it for data. That's slow, very slow. If your code in DbRepository changes, your unit test on Controller will fall. Only integration test must warn you of 'problems' in this case. What you need in unit tests - is to isolate your classes and test only one class in one test (in ideal - only one method). If your DbRepository code fails, you will think that Controller code failed - and that's bad (even if you have tests for DbRepository and Controller - they both will fail and you can start from the wrong place). It takes a lot of time to determine where the error really is. You need to know that class A is ok, and it was class B where something failed.
When you want to replace DbRepository with something else in all your classes, you have to do a lot of work.
You can't easily control the lifetime of DbRepository. An object of this class is created on initialization of Controller and deleted when Controller is deleted. There is no sharing between different instances of the Controller class and there is no sharing between other classes. With Ninject you can simply write:
kernel.Bind<IRepository>().To<DbRepository>().InSingletonScope();
A special feature of dependency injection - agile development! You describe that your controller uses a repository with interface IRepository. You don't need to write DbRepository, you can simply create a MemoryRepository class and develop Controller while another person develops DbRepository. When work on DbRepository is finished, you just rebind in your dependency resolver that default IRepository is now DbRepository. Have a lot of controllers? All of them will now use DbRepository. That's cool.
Read more:
Inversion of control (wiki)
Dependency injection (wiki)
Inversion of Control Containers and the Dependency Injection pattern (Martin Fowler)

Ninject is an Inversion of Control container.
What does it do?
Suppose you have a Car class that depends on a Driver class.
public class Car
{
public Car(IDriver driver)
{
///
}
}
In order to use the Car class you build it like so:
IDriver driver = new Driver();
var car = new Car(driver);
A IoC containter centralizes the knowledge about how to build classes. It is a central repository that knows a few things. For example, it knows that the concrete class that you need to use to build a car is a Driver and not any other IDriver.
For example, if you are developing a MVC application, you can tell Ninject how to build your controllers. You do so by registering which concrete classes satisfy specific interfaces. At run time Ninject will figure out which classes are needed to build the required controller, and all behind the scenes.
// Syntax for binding
Bind<IDriver>().To<Driver>();
This is beneficial because it lets you build systems that are more easily unit testable. Suppose that Driver encapsulates all database access for Car. In a unit test for Car you can do this:
IDriver driver = new TestDriver(); // a fake driver that does not go to the db
var car = new Car(driver);
There are entire frameworks that take care of automatically creating testing classes for you and they are called mocking frameworks.
For more information:
GitHub/Ninject Home
Inversion of Control
Inversion of Control Containers and the Dependency Injection pattern
Mock Object

Other answers are great but I would also like to point out this Implementing Dependency Injection using Ninject article.
This is one of the best articles I ever read which explains Dependency Injection and Ninject with a very elegant example.
Here's the snippet from the article:
Below Interface will be implemented by our (SMSService) and (MockSMSService), basically the new Interface (ISMSService) will expose the same behaviors of both services as the code below:
public interface ISMSService
{
void SendSMS(string phoneNumber, string body);
}
(SMSService) implementation to implement the (ISMSService) interface:
public class SMSService : ISMSService
{
public void SendSMS(string mobileNumber, string body)
{
SendSMSUsingGateway(mobileNumber, body);
}
private void SendSMSUsingGateway(string mobileNumber, string body)
{
/*implementation for sending SMS using gateway*/
Console.WriteLine("Sending SMS using gateway to mobile:
{0}. SMS body: {1}", mobileNumber, body);
}
}
(MockSMSService) with totally different implementation using the same interface:
public class MockSMSService :ISMSService
{
public void SendSMS(string phoneNumber, string body)
{
SaveSMSToFile(phoneNumber,body);
}
private void SaveSMSToFile(string mobileNumber, string body)
{
/*implementation for saving SMS to a file*/
Console.WriteLine("Mocking SMS using file to mobile:
{0}. SMS body: {1}", mobileNumber, body);
}
}
we need to implement a change to our (UIHandler) class constructor to pass the dependency through it, by doing this, the code which uses the (UIHandler) can determine which concrete implementation of (ISMSService) to use:
public class UIHandler
{
private readonly ISMSService _SMSService;
public UIHandler(ISMSService SMSService)
{
_SMSService = SMSService;
}
public void SendConfirmationMsg(string mobileNumber) {
_SMSService.SendSMS(mobileNumber, "Your order has been shipped successfully!");
}
}
Now, we have to create a separate class (NinjectBindings) which inherits from (NinjectModule). This class will be responsible to resolve dependencies at run time, then we’ll override the load event which is used to configure the binding in it. The nice thing about Ninject is that we do not need to change our code in (ISMSService), (SMSService), and (MockSMSService).
public class NinjectBindings : Ninject.Modules.NinjectModule
{
public override void Load()
{
Bind<ISMSService>().To<MockSMSService>();
}
}
Now in UI form code, we’ll use the binding for Ninject which will determine which implementation to use:
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
IKernel _Kernal = new StandardKernel();
_Kernal.Load(Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly());
ISMSService _SMSService = _Kernal.Get<ISMSService>();
UIHandler _UIHandler = new UIHandler(_SMSService);
_UIHandler.SendConfirmationMsg("96279544480");
Console.ReadLine();
}
}
Now the code is using the Ninject Kernal to resolve all chain of dependencies, if we want to use the real service (SMSService) in Release mode (on production environment) instead of the mock one, we need to change on the Ninject binding class (NinjectBindings) only to use the right implementation or by using the #if DEBUG directive as below:
public class NinjectBindings : Ninject.Modules.NinjectModule
{
public override void Load()
{
#if DEBUG
Bind<ISMSService>().To<MockSMSService>();
#else
Bind<ISMSService>().To<SMSService>();
#endif
}
}
Now our binding class (NinjectBindings) is living on the top of all our execution code and we can control the configuration easily in once place.
Also, see What is Inversion of Control? some very simple examples are mentioned to understand IoC.

You have to understand the Dependency Injection(DI) first. Notice here,
public interface IService
{
void Serve();
}
public class Service1 : IService
{
public void Serve() {
Console.WriteLine("Service1 Called");
}
}
public class Service2 : IService
{
public void Serve() {
Console.WriteLine("Service2 Called");
}
}
public class Service3 : IService
{
public void Serve() {
Console.WriteLine("Service3 Called");
}
}
public class Client
{
private IService service;
public Client(IService _service) //Constructor injection
{
service = _service;
}
public void ServeMethod() {
service.Serve(); //Notice here, this Serve() method has no idea what to do.
} // runtime will assign the object, that is Ninject
}
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
IService s1 = new Service1(); //N.B. Ninject assigns object with interface
Client c1 = new Client(s1);
c1.ServeMethod();
IService s2 = new Service2(); //N.B. Ninject assigns object with interface
c1 = new Client(s2);
c1.ServeMethod();
IService s3 = new Service3(); //N.B. Ninject assigns object with interface
c1 = new Client(s3);
c1.ServeMethod();
Console.ReadKey();
}
}
// Ninject creates object in runtime for interface in runtime in ASP.NET MVC project.
/*
Output:
Service1 Called
Service2 Called
Service3 Called
*/