Related
I have one dependency registered as follows:
interface IDependency { }
class DependencyImpl : IDependency { }
Startup:
services.AddScoped<IDependency, DependencyImpl>();
This works as intendended as I do want to reuse the same instance in the scope of my Web API requests.
However, in one background service, I'd like to tell which instance it will resolve to:
class MyBackgroundService
{
private readonly IServiceScopeFactory _scopeFactory; // set in ctor
public void DoStuff()
{
var itens = GetItens();
var dependencyInstance = new DependencyImpl();
Parallel.ForEach(itens, (item) =>
{
using(var scope = _scopeFactory.CreateScope())
{
scope.SwapDependencyForThisScopeOnly<IDependency>( () => dependencyInstance ); // something like this
var someOtherService = scope.ServiceProvider.GetRequiredService<ItemService(); // resolve subsequent services with provided dependencyInstance
someOtherService.Process(item);
}
});
}
}
I can't reuse the same Scope because ItemService (and/or it's dependencies) uses other scoped services that can't be shared. Neither I want to replace dependency resolution for the entire application.
Is it possible to do what I want here? Does it make sense?
I'm using dotnet core 2.2 with default IoC container for that matters.
Edit in reply to #Steven: DependencyImpl contains configurations for how an item will be processed. One of those includes an relatively expensive query. DependencyImpl is also injected more than once in the graph. So, currently, it reads the configuration once, cache them in private properties, and use the cached version on subsequent reads. Because I know I'll be reusing the same configuration for all itens here, I'd like to avoid reading the configuration again for each parallel execution.
My real-world dependency is more similar to this:
interface IDependency
{
Task<Configuration> GetConfigurationAsync();
}
class DependencyImpl : IDependency
{
private readonly Configuration _configuration;
private readonly DbContext _dbContext;
ctor(DbContext dbContext)
{
_dbContext = dbContext;
}
public async Task<Configuration> GetConfigurationAsync()
{
if(_configuration is null)
{
// read configurations
}
return _configuration;
}
}
I understand that, as is, my class is not thread-safe. I'd have to force a read at the start and/or add some thread safety here.
Also, those processings used to happen during the lifetime of a web request, and the background service is the new stuff. I'd prefer to change as little of existing code as possible, because there are few tests in place, and of course time constraints from the powers-that-be.
In general, it is not a good idea to change the structure of the registered object graphs while the application is running. Not only is this hard to achieve with most containers, it is prone to suble problems that are hard to detect. I, therefore, suggest a small change in your design that change circumvents the problem you are facing.
Instead of trying to change the dependency as a whole, instead pre-populate an existing dependency with the data loaded on a a different thread.
This can be done using the following abstraction/implementation pair:
public interface IConfigurationProvider
{
Task<Configuration> GetConfigurationAsync();
}
public sealed class DatabaseConfigurationProvider : IConfigurationProvider
{
private readonly DbContext _dbContext;
public DatabaseConfigurationProvider(DbContext dbContext)
{
_dbContext = dbContext;
}
public Configuration Configuration { get; set; }
public async Task<Configuration> GetConfigurationAsync()
{
if (Configuration is null)
{
await // read configurations
}
return Configuration;
}
}
Notice the public Configuration on the DatabaseConfigurationProvider implementation, which is not on the IConfigurationProvider interface.
This is the core of the solution I'm presenting. Allow your Composition Root to set the value, without polluting your application abstractions, as application code doesn't need to overwrite the Configuration object; only the Composition Root needs to.
With this abstraction/implementation pair, the background service can look like this:
class MyBackgroundService
{
private readonly IServiceScopeFactory _scopeFactory; // set in ctor
public Task DoStuff()
{
var itens = GetItens();
// Create a scope for the root operation.
using (var scope = _scopeFactory.CreateScope())
{
// Resolve the IConfigurationProvider first to load
// the configuration once eagerly.
var provider = scope.ServiceProvider
.GetRequiredService<IConfigurationProvider>();
var configuration = await provider.GetConfigurationAsync();
Parallel.ForEach(itens, (item) => Process(configuration, item));
}
}
private void Process(Configuration configuration, Item item)
{
// Create a new scope per thread
using (var scope = _scopeFactory.CreateScope())
{
// Request the configuration implementation that allows
// setting the configuration.
var provider = scope.ServiceProvider
.GetRequiredService<DatabaseConfigurationProvider>();
// Set the configuration object for the duration of the scope
provider.Configuration = configuration;
// Resolve an object graph that depends on IConfigurationProvider.
var service = scope.ServiceProvider.GetRequiredService<ItemService>();
service.Process(item);
}
}
}
To pull this off, you need the following DI configuration:
services.AddScoped<DatabaseConfigurationProvider>();
services.AddScoped<IConfigurationProvider>(
p => p.GetRequiredService<DatabaseConfigurationProvider>());
This previous configuration registers DatabaseConfigurationProvider twice: once for its concrete type, once for its interface. The interface registration forwards the call and resolves the concrete type directly. This is a special 'trick' you have to apply when working with the MS.DI container, to prevent getting two separate DatabaseConfigurationProvider instances inside a single scope. That would completely defeat the correctness of this implementation.
Make an interface that extends IDependency and only applies to the faster implementation that you need to request, e.g., IFasterDependency. Then make a registration for IFasterDependency. That way your faster class is still an IDependency object and you won't disrupt too much existing code, but you can now request it freely.
public interface IDependency
{
// Actual, useful interface definition
}
public interface IFasterDependency : IDependency
{
// You don't actually have to define anything here
}
public class SlowClass : IDependency
{
}
// FasterClass is now a IDependencyObject, but has its own interface
// so you can register it in your dependency injection
public class FasterClass : IFasterDependency
{
}
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.
I'm new in AutoFac and I'm come across two problems that I need to implement in my WPF project using MVVM. I'm using an interface to implement a repository, but I'm going to implement multiple repositories for SQL, XML, and CSV. So my interface has this:
public interface IRepository<T> : IReadOnlyRepository<T>, IWriteOnlyRepository<T>
{
}
// covariance interface
public interface IReadOnlyRepository<out T> : IDisposable
{
T FindById(int id);
IEnumerable<T> GetAllRecords();
}
// contravariance interface
public interface IWriteOnlyRepository<in T> : IDisposable
{
void Add(T item);
void Delete(T item);
int Save();
}
public class SQLRepository<T> : IRepository<T>
{
// implements the interface using Entity Framework
}
public class XMLRepository<T> : IRepository<T>
{
// implements the interface using XML Serializer/Deserializer
}
public class CSVRepository<T> : IRepository<T>
{
// Implements the interface for TextReader/TextWriter for CSV Files (Excel)
}
So here's the rub: I was told by the boss that the customer needs to change repositories while still running the program. So I need to dynamically change the repository at run time. The default will be SQL Server, but the client may want to change to XML... WITHOUT losing the data that is already in the repository. The reason behind it is that if they load a configuration from SQL but they want to save it to a XML file and send it to their client, they can do so
-- OR --
They get an XML file from one of their clients, and they want to save the configuration to SQL, they can do so without worrying about re-entering the data.
I solved one problem by using Generics because I'll be using the same POCO data model class and therefore it preserves the data but then:
How do I implement the 3 different concrete repository classes?
How do I pass in the parameter of T?
I thought about using "named services" to differentiate between the concrete repository classes, and a model base class. I then would use a bootstrapper to look like this:
public class BootStrapper
{
public IContainer BootStrap()
{
var builder = new ContainerBuilder();
builder.RegisterType<MainWindow>.AsSelf();
builder.RegisterType<MainViewModel>.As<IMainViewModel>();
//?? How do I resolve T of IRepository<T>?
builder.RegisterType<SQLRepository>.Named<IRepository>("SQL")
builder.RegisterType<XMLRepository>.Named<IRepository>("XML")
builder.RegisterType<CSVRepository>.Named<IRepository>("CSV")
return builder.Build();
}
}
public partial class App : Application
{
protected override void OnStartUp(StartUpEventArgs e)
{
base.OnStartUp(e);
var bootsrapper = new BootStrapper();
var container = bootstrapper.BootStrap();
// ?? How do I set the SQLRepository as default?
var mainWindow = container.Resolve<MainWindow>();
mainWindow.Show();
}
}
Any suggestions?
EDIT: I forgot to add in there that I'm using Dependency Injection on my ViewModels, so therefore, in my MainViewModel:
public class MainViewModel
{
private IRepository<Model> _repository;
public MainViewModel(IRepository<Model> repo)
{
_repository = _repo;
}
}
now I did try as suggested that I change the code to this:
builder.RegisterGeneric(typeof(SQLRepository<>).As(typeof(IRepository<>));
builder.RegisterGeneric(typeof(XMLRepository<>).As(typeof(IRepository<>));
I then debug the code by stepping into it, and when I hit at MainViewModel constructor, it's giving me XMLRepository class. From what I've read in the documentation for "default registrations", it will always be XMLRepository and never SQLRepository. I then tried to "open generic decorator registration" like:
builder.RegisterGeneric(typeof(SQLRepository<>).Named("SQL", typeof(IRepository<>));
builder.RegisterGeneric(typeof(XMLRepository<>).Named("XML", typeof(IRepository<>));
builder.RegisterGenericDecorator(typeof(SQLRepository<>), typeof(IRepository<>), fromKey: "SQL");
builder.RegisterGenericDecorator(typeof(XMLRepository<>), typeof(IRepository<>), fromKey: "XML");
But then how do I resolve it when I'm trying to use the MainWindow?
UPDATE EDIT #2
Okay, so I was asked by a legitimate question by tdragon about how I wanted this resolved. The MainWindow.xaml.cs file looks like this:
public partial class MainWindow : Window
{
private MainViewModel _viewModel;
public MainWindow(MainViewModel viewModel)
{
InitializeComponent();
_viewModel = viewModel;
DataContext = _viewModel;
}
}
But the real problem is with the App.xaml.cs file, which I've already gave the code in the in my original question.
There is a Good article here in autofac documentation.
Use the RegisterGeneric() builder method to register generic components as below.
var builder = new ContainerBuilder();
builder.RegisterGeneric(typeof(SQLRepository<>));
builder.RegisterGeneric(typeof(XMLRepository<>));
builder.RegisterGeneric(typeof(CSVRepository<>));
builder.RegisterGeneric(typeof(SQLRepository<>))
.As(typeof(IRepository<>))
.InstancePerLifetimeScope();
builder.RegisterGeneric(typeof(XMLRepository<>))
.As(typeof(IRepository<>))
.InstancePerLifetimeScope();
builder.RegisterGeneric(typeof(CSVRepository<>))
.As(typeof(IRepository<>))
.InstancePerLifetimeScope();
builder.Register(c => new Myclass()).OnActivating(
e =>
{
e.Instance.SqlTaskRepo = e.Context.Resolve<SQLRepository<Task>>();
}
);
UPDATED
You can resolve T by scanning assembly instead that would be better way to resolve kindly take a look below code hope it will help you
builder.RegisterGeneric(typeof(SQLRepository<>));
builder.RegisterGeneric(typeof(XMLRepository<>));
builder.RegisterGeneric(typeof(CSVRepository<>));
var dataAccess = Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly();
builder.RegisterAssemblyTypes(dataAccess)
.Where(t => typeof(SQLRepository<>).IsAssignableFrom(t));
builder.RegisterAssemblyTypes(dataAccess)
.Where(t => typeof(XMLRepository<>).IsAssignableFrom(t));
builder.RegisterAssemblyTypes(dataAccess)
.Where(t => typeof(CSVRepository<>).IsAssignableFrom(t));
builder.RegisterType<MainViewModel>();
One of possible solution would be to register your repositories using keys, instead of names:
var builder = new ContainerBuilder();
builder.RegisterGeneric(typeof(SqlRepository<>)).Keyed(RepositoryType.Sql, typeof(IRepository<>));
builder.RegisterGeneric(typeof(XmlRepository<>)).Keyed(RepositoryType.Xml, typeof(IRepository<>));
builder.RegisterGeneric(typeof(CsvRepository<>)).Keyed(RepositoryType.Csv, typeof(IRepository<>));
where keys would be some enum values (string could be used as well, but imho enum is cleaner and less error-prone), e.g.
enum RepositoryType { Sql, Xml, Csv }
Then, instead of injecting IRepository<Model> which always gives you latest registered dependency, you can inject IIndex<RepositoryType, IRepository<Model>>. Using index operator you can get proper repository type. In addition, you can implement some kind of ConfigurationProvider, where you can store currently selected type of repository, like:
public interface IConfigurationProvider
{
RepositoryType SelectedRepositoryType { get; set; }
}
public class ConfigurationProvider : IConfigurationProvider
{
public RepositoryType SelectedRepositoryType
{
get { /* read the value from some configuration file */ }
set { /* store the new value */ }
}
}
Of course, it should be also registered in the container. You can store this value wherever you want (app.config, any other custom file).
Then, the constructor of MainViewModel would look like this:
public MainViewModel(
IIndex<RepositoryType, IRepository<Model>> repoIndex,
IConfigurationProvider configurationProvider)
{
var repository = repoIndex[configurationProvider.SelectedRepositoryType]; // would return the repository of currently selected type
}
You can find more details about IIndex in Autofac documentation.
I have to admit, I was a bit floored when I got this answer. I'm posting this answer for anyone else that might have the same problem I've was facing.
Since the solution that was provided to me didn't work right (until tdragon updated his answer), I went to Googlegroups for Autofac and someone else came up with the answer.
However, I have given the credit to tdragon (thanks dude!) for coming up with the IIndex method which is why I put his post as an answer, but I gotten more feedback about it from other sources which is why I'm posting my answer.
I went and contacted Thomas Claudius Huber, the author of two great Pluralsight courses on WPF and MVVM. One was on doing ModelWrappers, and the other was doing unit testing with ViewModels. I strongly suggest those courses to newbies that are trying to refine their WPF and MVVM skills. It was his courses that got me turned on Autofac and it help out tremendously. Thomas and tdragon's solution using IIndexing did help resolve the problem.
But there is an interesting alternative that someone on the Autofac Googlegroup by Alex Meyer-Gleaves. His first alternative was using a Lambda expression which was:
builder.Register(c => new MainViewModel(c.ResolveNamed<IRepository<Stock>>("XMLrepository"), c.ResolveNamed<IRepository<Vendor>>("SQLRepository"))).AsSelf();
But he also mentioned that starting with Autofac 4.3.0, there was an attribute filter that will help with the issue. First thing I needed to do was add ".WithAttributeFiltering()" when building the container like this:
public IContainer BootStrap()
{
builder.RegisterType<MainViewModel>().AsSelf().WithAttributeFiltering();
builder.RegisterType<MainView>().AsSelf();
builder.RegisterGeneric(typeof(XMLRepository<>)).Keyed("XMLRepository", typeof(IRepository<>));
builder.RegisterGeneric(typeof(SQLRepository<>)).Keyed("SQLRepository", typeof(IRepository<>));
return builder.Build();
}
Then in the constructor, you can do this:
public MainViewModel([KeyFilter("XMLRepository")]IRepository<Stock> stockRepo,
[KeyFilter("XMLRepository")]IRepository<Vendor> vendorRepo)
{ ... // code here }
Thanks guys for all your help!
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()
I am building an ASP.NET Core MVC application with Entity Framework Code-First.
I implemented a simple repository pattern, providing basic CRUD operations for all the model classes I have created.
I chose to follow all the recommendations provided in docs and DI is one of these.
In ~~.NET 5~~ (6 years later update: .net 5 was the alpha name of .net core 1.0) dependency injection works very well for any class that we do not directly instantiate (e.g.: controllers, data repositories, ...).
We simply inject them via the constructor, and register the mappings in the Startup class of the application :
// Some repository class
public class MyRepository : IMyRepository
{
private readonly IMyDependency _myDependency;
public MyRepository(IMyDependency myDependency)
{
_myDependency = myDependency;
}
}
// In startup.cs :
services.AddScoped<IMyDependency, MyDependency>();
services.AddScoped<IMyRepository, MyRepository>();
The problem is that in some of my model classes, I would like to inject some of the dependencies I have declared.
But I think that I cannot use the constructor injection pattern because model classes are often explicitly instantiated. Therefore, I would need to provide myself with the dependencies, which I can't.
So my question is: is there another way than constructor injection to inject dependencies, and how? I was for example thinking of an attribute pattern or something like that.
As I already explained in a comment, when creating an object using new, there is nothing from the dependency injection framework that is involved in the process. As such, it’s impossible for the DI framework to magically inject things into that object, it simply doesn’t know about it.
Since it does not make any sense to let the DI framework create your model instances (models are not a dependency), you will have to pass in your dependencies explicitly if you want the model to have them. How you do that depends a bit on what your models are used for, and what those dependencies are.
The simple and clear case would be to just have your model expect the dependencies on the constructor. That way, it is a compile time error if you do not provide them, and the model has access to them right away. As such, whatever is above, creating the models, is required to have the dependencies the model type needs. But at that level, it’s likely that this is a service or a controller which has access to DI and can request the dependency itself.
Of course, depending on the number of dependencies, this might become a bit complicated as you need to pass them all to the constructor. So one alternative would be to have some “model factory” that takes care of creating the model object. Another alternative would also be to use the service locator pattern, passing the IServiceCollection to the model which can then request whatever dependencies it needs. Note that is generally a bad practice and not really inversion of control anymore.
Both these ideas have the issue that they modify the way the object is created. And some models, especially those handled by Entity Framework, need an empty constructor in order for EF to be able to create the object. So at that point you will probably end up with some cases where the dependencies of your model are not resolved (and you have no easy way of telling).
A generally better way, which is also a lot more explicit, would be to pass in the dependency where you need it, e.g. if you have some method on the model that calculates some stuff but requires some configuration, let the method require that configuration. This also makes the methods easier to test.
Another solution would be to move the logic out of the model. For example the ASP.NET Identity models are really dumb. They don’t do anything. All the logic is done in the UserStore which is a service and as such can have service dependencies.
The pattern often used in domain driven design (rich domain model to be specific) is to pass the required services into the method you are calling.
For example if you want to calculate the vat, you'd pass the vat service into the CalculateVat method.
In your model
public void CalculateVat(IVatCalculator vatCalc)
{
if(vatCalc == null)
throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(vatCalc));
decimal vatAmount = vatcalc.Calculate(this.TotalNetPrice, this.Country);
this.VatAmount = new Currency(vatAmount, this.CurrencySymbol);
}
Your service class
// where vatCalculator is an implementation IVatCalculator
order.CalculateVat(vatCalculator);
Finally your service can inject another services, like a repository which will fetch the tax rate for a certain country
public class VatCalculator : IVatCalculator
{
private readonly IVatRepository vatRepository;
public VatCalculator(IVatRepository vatRepository)
{
if(vatRepository == null)
throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(vatRepository));
this.vatRepository = vatRepository;
}
public decimal Calculate(decimal value, Country country)
{
decimal vatRate = vatRepository.GetVatRateForCountry(country);
return vatAmount = value * vatRate;
}
}
I know my answer is late and may not exactly what you're asking for, but I wanted to share how I do it.
First of all: If you want to have a static class that resolves your dependencies this is a ServiceLocator and it's Antipattern so try not to use it as you can.
In my case I needed it to call MediatR inside of my DomainModel to implement the DomainEvents logic.
Anyway, I had to find a way to call a static class in my DomainModel to get an instance of some registered service from DI.
So I've decided to use the HttpContext to access the IServiceProvider but I needed to access it from a static method without mention it in my domain model.
Let's do it:
1- I've created an interface to wrap the IServiceProvider
public interface IServiceProviderProxy
{
T GetService<T>();
IEnumerable<T> GetServices<T>();
object GetService(Type type);
IEnumerable<object> GetServices(Type type);
}
2- Then I've created a static class to be my ServiceLocator access point
public static class ServiceLocator
{
private static IServiceProviderProxy diProxy;
public static IServiceProviderProxy ServiceProvider => diProxy ?? throw new Exception("You should Initialize the ServiceProvider before using it.");
public static void Initialize(IServiceProviderProxy proxy)
{
diProxy = proxy;
}
}
3- I've created an implementation for the IServiceProviderProxy which use internally the IHttpContextAccessor
public class HttpContextServiceProviderProxy : IServiceProviderProxy
{
private readonly IHttpContextAccessor contextAccessor;
public HttpContextServiceProviderProxy(IHttpContextAccessor contextAccessor)
{
this.contextAccessor = contextAccessor;
}
public T GetService<T>()
{
return contextAccessor.HttpContext.RequestServices.GetService<T>();
}
public IEnumerable<T> GetServices<T>()
{
return contextAccessor.HttpContext.RequestServices.GetServices<T>();
}
public object GetService(Type type)
{
return contextAccessor.HttpContext.RequestServices.GetService(type);
}
public IEnumerable<object> GetServices(Type type)
{
return contextAccessor.HttpContext.RequestServices.GetServices(type);
}
}
4- I should register the IServiceProviderProxy in the DI like this
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddHttpContextAccessor();
services.AddSingleton<IServiceProviderProxy, HttpContextServiceProviderProxy>();
.......
}
5- Final step is to initialize the ServiceLocator with an instance of IServiceProviderProxy at the Application startup
public void Configure(IApplicationBuilder app, IHostingEnvironment env,IServiceProvider sp)
{
ServiceLocator.Initialize(sp.GetService<IServiceProviderProxy>());
}
As a result now you can call the ServiceLocator in your DomainModel classes "Or and needed place" and resolve the dependencies that you need.
public class FakeModel
{
public FakeModel(Guid id, string value)
{
Id = id;
Value = value;
}
public Guid Id { get; }
public string Value { get; private set; }
public async Task UpdateAsync(string value)
{
Value = value;
var mediator = ServiceLocator.ServiceProvider.GetService<IMediator>();
await mediator.Send(new FakeModelUpdated(this));
}
}
The built-in model binders complain that they cannot find a default ctor. Therefore you need a custom one.
You may find a solution to a similar problem here, which inspects the registered services in order to create the model.
It is important to note that the snippets below provide slightly different functionality which, hopefully, satisfies your particular needs. The code below expects models with ctor injections. Of course, these models have the usual properties you might have defined. These properties are filled in exactly as expected, so the bonus is the correct behavior when binding models with ctor injections.
public class DiModelBinder : ComplexTypeModelBinder
{
public DiModelBinder(IDictionary<ModelMetadata, IModelBinder> propertyBinders) : base(propertyBinders)
{
}
/// <summary>
/// Creates the model with one (or more) injected service(s).
/// </summary>
/// <param name="bindingContext"></param>
/// <returns></returns>
protected override object CreateModel(ModelBindingContext bindingContext)
{
var services = bindingContext.HttpContext.RequestServices;
var modelType = bindingContext.ModelType;
var ctors = modelType.GetConstructors();
foreach (var ctor in ctors)
{
var paramTypes = ctor.GetParameters().Select(p => p.ParameterType).ToList();
var parameters = paramTypes.Select(p => services.GetService(p)).ToArray();
if (parameters.All(p => p != null))
{
var model = ctor.Invoke(parameters);
return model;
}
}
return null;
}
}
This binder will be provided by:
public class DiModelBinderProvider : IModelBinderProvider
{
public IModelBinder GetBinder(ModelBinderProviderContext context)
{
if (context == null) { throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(context)); }
if (context.Metadata.IsComplexType && !context.Metadata.IsCollectionType)
{
var propertyBinders = context.Metadata.Properties.ToDictionary(property => property, context.CreateBinder);
return new DiModelBinder(propertyBinders);
}
return null;
}
}
Here's how the binder would be registered:
services.AddMvc().AddMvcOptions(options =>
{
// replace ComplexTypeModelBinderProvider with its descendent - IoCModelBinderProvider
var provider = options.ModelBinderProviders.FirstOrDefault(x => x.GetType() == typeof(ComplexTypeModelBinderProvider));
var binderIndex = options.ModelBinderProviders.IndexOf(provider);
options.ModelBinderProviders.Remove(provider);
options.ModelBinderProviders.Insert(binderIndex, new DiModelBinderProvider());
});
I'm not quite sure if the new binder must be registered exactly at the same index, you can experiment with this.
And, at the end, this is how you can use it:
public class MyModel
{
private readonly IMyRepository repo;
public MyModel(IMyRepository repo)
{
this.repo = repo;
}
... do whatever you want with your repo
public string AProperty { get; set; }
... other properties here
}
Model class is created by the binder which supplies the (already registered) service, and the rest of the model binders provide the property values from their usual sources.
HTH
Is there another way than constructor injection to inject dependencies, and how?
The answer is "no", this cannot be done with "dependency injection". But, "yes" you can use the "service locator pattern" to achieve your end-goal.
You can use the code below to resolve a dependency without the use of constructor injection or the FromServices attribute. Additionally you can new up an instance of the class as you see fit and it will still work -- assuming that you have added the dependency in the Startup.cs.
public class MyRepository : IMyRepository
{
public IMyDependency { get; } =
CallContextServiceLocator.Locator
.ServiceProvider
.GetRequiredService<IMyDependency>();
}
The CallContextServiceLocator.Locator.ServiceProvider is the global service provider, where everything lives. It is not really advised to use this. But if you have no other choice you can. It would be recommended to instead use DI all the way and never manually instantiate an object, i.e.; avoid new.
I'm simply adding some supplemental information here to the answers provided that can help.
IServiceProvider was provided in the accepted answer, but not the important IServiceProvider.CreateScope() method. You can use it to create scopes as necessary that you added through ConfigureServices.
I'm not sure if IServiceProvider is actually a Service Locator pattern behind the scenes or not, but it's how you create scopes as far as I know. At least in the case if it is a Service Locator pattern, it's the official one for today in .NET, and so it's not compounded by the problems of writing your own Service Locator, which I also agree is anti-pattern.
Example, Startup.cs/ConfigureServices and Configure:
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddDbContext<SomeDbContext>(options =>
{
options.UseSqlServer(Configuration.GetSection("Databases").GetSection("SomeDb")["ConnectionString"]);
options.UseQueryTrackingBehavior(QueryTrackingBehavior.NoTracking);
}, ServiceLifetime.Scoped);
services.AddMvcCore().AddNewtonsoftJson();
services.AddControllersWithViews();
}
public async void Configure(IApplicationBuilder app, IWebHostEnvironment env, IServiceProvider provider)
{
...
IServiceScope scope = provider.CreateScope();
SomeDbContext context = scope.ServiceProvider.GetRequiredService<SomeDbContext>();
SomeModelProxyClass example = new SomeModelProxyClass(context);
await example.BuildDefaults(
Configuration.GetSection("ProfileDefaults").GetSection("Something"),
Configuration.GetSection("ProfileDefaults").GetSection("SomethingSomething"));
scope.Dispose();
}
The above is for doing some default interactions on Startup, maybe if you need to build some default records in your database on a first usage, just as an example.
Ok so let's get to your repository and dependency though, will they work?
Yep!
Here's a test in my own CRUD project, I made a simple minimalist implementation of your IMyDependency and IMyRepository like so, then added them scoped as you did to Startup/ConfigureServices:
public interface IMyRepository
{
string WriteMessage(string input);
}
public interface IMyDependency
{
string GetTimeStamp();
}
public class MyDependency : IMyDependency
{
public MyDependency()
{
}
public string GetTimeStamp()
{
return DateTime.Now.ToLongDateString() + " " + DateTime.Now.ToLongTimeString();
}
}
public class MyRepository : IMyRepository
{
private readonly IMyDependency _myDependency;
public MyRepository(IMyDependency myDependency)
{
_myDependency = myDependency;
}
public string WriteMessage(string input)
{
return input + " - " + _myDependency.GetTimeStamp();
}
}
Here ContextCRUD is a Model class from my own project not derived from Scaffold-DbContext tooling like my other database classes, it's a container of logic from those scaffold Model classes, and so I put it in the namespace Models.ProxyModels to hold its own business logic for doing CRUD operations so that the Controllers are not gummed up with logic that should be in the Model:
public ContextCRUD(DbContext context, IServiceProvider provider)
{
Context = context;
Provider = provider;
var scope = provider.CreateScope();
var dep1 = scope.ServiceProvider.GetService<IMyRepository>();
string msg = dep1.WriteMessage("Current Time:");
scope.Dispose();
}
Debugging I get back the expected results in msg, so it all checks out.
The calling code from the Controller for reference, just so you can see how IServiceProvider is passed from upstream by constructor injection in the Controller:
[Route("api/[controller]")]
public class GenericController<T> : Controller where T: DbContext
{
T Context { get; set; }
ContextCRUD CRUD { get; set; }
IConfiguration Configuration { get; set; }
public GenericController(T context, IConfiguration configuration, IServiceProvider provider)
{
Context = context;
CRUD = new ContextCRUD(context, provider);
Configuration = configuration;
}
...
You can do it, check out [InjectionMethod] and container.BuildUp(instance);
Example:
Typical DI constructor (NOT NEEDED IF YOU USE InjectionMethod) public
ClassConstructor(DeviceHead pDeviceHead) {
this.DeviceHead = pDeviceHead; }
This attribute causes this method to be called to setup DI.
[InjectionMethod] public void Initialize(DeviceHead pDeviceHead) {
this.DeviceHead = pDeviceHead; }