How to manage discovery and composition as 2 separate concerns? - c#

I have set up an assembly catalog:
private CompositionContainer GetContainer() {
// initialize directory info
ExtensionDirectory = new DirectoryInfo(settings.ExtensionsPath);
// directory catalog
var dirCatalog = new DirectoryCatalog(ExtensionDirectory.FullName);
return new CompositionContainer(dirCatalog);
}
The contents of the container will load up all the assemblies in the directory as expected. I do not want to actually compose anything yet because I have constructors that will be injected with dependencies.
What I want to do is use the AssemblyCatalog as a repository; query for a specific export, pass the constructor dependency, then compose only the parts involved in this process.
From what I understand, if I were to call
_container.ComposeParts(this);
...without providing exports for the [ImportingConstructor]s, then none of the parts would be included in the _container.
In order to facilitate queries to the container, I have a method as follows:
public Lazy<IEntity> GetPart(Func<Lazy<IEntity, IEntityMetaData>, bool> selector) {
var entity = _container.GetExports<IEntity, IEntityMetaData>()
.Where(selector)
.Select(e => e as Lazy<IEntity>)
.FirstOrDefault();
return entity; // this will be passed up to the composition service
}
It seems that GetExports<T, M>() will not return an export containing an [ImportingConstructor] if the part which would satisfy the dependency is not included in the container.
My approach is to have an extension container/catalog at a low level; a higher level composition service will receive all parts and compose the final object. I decided on this approach so we would be able to add/extend the types of catalogs available in the future.

I think these concerns are already separated: discovery is handled by catalogs, and composition is done by export providers.
In the typical case, you just pass a catalog directly to the container and for convenience it will automatically take care of creating an CatalogExportProvider for it.
But you can also create one or more export providers yourself and pass them to the container with this constructor overload. (You may also have to set the SourceProvider to point back at the container after that, so that the export providers can use each other.)
You can create your own ExportProvider implementations, and they don't even have to be backed by catalogs.

In order to satisfy the requirements, I created 3 classes:
public sealed class CompositionFactory {
[Import("Provider")]
private IProvider importProvider;
/* MEF initialization */
}
[Export("Provider")]
public sealed class AssemblyProvider : IProvider {
private CatalogExportProvider _provider;
}
internal sealed class ComposableAggregate { }
The CompositionFactory initializes MEF to discover the AssemblyProvider. When the provider initializes:
private CatalogExportProvider InitializeProvider() {
// directory catalog
var dirCatalog = new DirectoryCatalog(ExtensionDirectory.FullName);
return new CatalogExportProvider(dirCatalog);
}
...we return a CatalogExportProvider. I can now use an API to the CompositionFactory:
public ISomething GetSomething(string ContractName, object ContractParam) {
// implementation
}
...to query for the correct composable part using a contract name:
public ComposablePartDefinition GetPartDefinition(string ContractName) {
return _provider.Catalog.Parts
.Where(p => p.ExportDefinitions
.Select(e => e.ContractName)
.Any(c => c == ContractName))
.FirstOrDefault();
}
The work is then completed in the ComposableAggregate helper class:
internal ISomething Value {
get {
return _container.GetExport<IEntity>(_contractName).Value;
}
}
private CompositionBatch CreateBatch() {
CompositionBatch batch = new CompositionBatch();
// create composable part from definition
ComposablePart importDef = CreatePart(_contractName);
batch.AddPart(importDef);
return batch;
}
private ComposablePart CreatePart(string ContractName) {
// get part definition from catalog
return _provider.GetPartDefinition(ContractName).CreatePart();
}

Related

Change dependency resolution for specific scope only

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
{
}

How to override config.json data using C# code?

I have followed this blog here on how to use IOC with Autofac, this is the first time hearing about IOC and autoFac.
I have downloaded the project from the link the blog provided and I have been looking through the project and I am trying to find out how the classes:
public class DatabaseSettings
{
public string ConnectionString { get; protected set; }
public int TimeoutSeconds { get; protected set; }
}
public class UserSettings
{
public string DefaultUsername { get; protected set; }
public bool ActiveByDefault { get; protected set; }
}
... gets populated without no invocation of the load function in 'Database reader'?
Is it because of (these) :
public T Load<T>() where T : class, new() => Load(typeof(T)) as T;
public T LoadSection<T>() where T : class, new() => LoadSection(typeof(T)) as T;
If it is the above codes what are they(so I can read up on how they work)?
Final Question, Is it possible to save the data back to the config.json using this approach?
The entries like
public T Load<T>() where T : class, new() => Load(typeof(T)) as T;
just mean you can use the "generic" syntax when accessing in the functions. It's a bit neater than passing in the Type as a method parameter, and also means you get a strongly-typed object back. Another way of writing the above is:
public T Load<T>() where T : class, new()
{
var type = typeof(T);
var loaded = Load(type);
return loaded as T;
}
It's a useful language feature but nothing to do with IoC itself. The IoC magic itself is mostly contained in SettingsModule. This bit:
builder.RegisterInstance(new SettingsReader(_configurationFilePath, _sectionNameSuffix))
.As<ISettingsReader>()
.SingleInstance();
tells Autofac to provide a SettingsReader (the RegisterInstance part) whenever anyone requests an ISettingsReader (the As<> bit). .SingleInstance means it will treat the SettingsReader as a singleton: only one of them will be created and that same object is passed to everywhere an ISettingsReader is requested.
This other part
var settings = Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly()
.GetTypes()
.Where(t => t.Name.EndsWith(_sectionNameSuffix, StringComparison.InvariantCulture))
.ToList();
settings.ForEach(type =>
{
builder.Register(c => c.Resolve<ISettingsReader>().LoadSection(type))
.As(type)
.SingleInstance();
});
is just a fancy way of automatically telling it what to do whenever it sees a request for DatabaseSettings or UserSettings. As per the original question, this is where the Load function is actually called. A simpler way of doing the same would just be:
builder.Register(c => c.Resolve<ISettingsReader>().LoadSection(typeof(DatabaseSettings))).As<DatabaseSettings>();
builder.Register(c => c.Resolve<ISettingsReader>().LoadSection(typeof(UserSettings))).As<UserSettings>();
You could write out the logic for those as "when a DatabaseSettings object is requested (.As), find an implementation for ISettingsReader, and then call LoadSection on that (the first part)"
Elsewhere in the Container class there's also this:
builder.RegisterType<UserService>().As<IUserService>();
which just tells Autofac what to do for an IUserService.
The result is that where in the main application method we have:
using (var scope = container.BeginLifetimeScope())
{
var userService = scope.Resolve<IUserService>();
Without that main method "knowing" anything about the concrete types it uses, we'll get a fully functioning IUserService back. Internally, Autofac will resolve the chain of dependencies required by plugging all of the constructor parameters for each type in the chain. That might look something like:
IUserService requested
Resolve UserService
Resolve IDatabase
return Database
Resolve UserSettings
Resolve ISettingsReader
return SettingsReader
Call LoadSection on ISettingsReader
return generated UserSettings object
For your Final Question - yes! However, IoC isn't necessarily what would enable you to do so. It just lets you bind together and access whichever custom classes you'd create to allow saving.
You might create a new interface like
public interface ISettingsWriter
{
void Save<T>(T settings);
}
And then for some reason you add a method which accesses that in the UserService:
public class UserService : IUserService
{
private readonly IDatabase _database;
private readonly UserSettings _userSettings;
private readonly ISettingsWriter _settingsWriter;
public UserService(IDatabase database, UserSettings userSettings, ISettingsWriter settingsWriter)
{
_database = database;
_userSettings = userSettings;
_settingsWriter = settingsWriter;
}
public void UpdateUserSettings()
{
_settingsWriter.Save(new UserSettings());
}
Using it in this way is a bit simpler than in the original sample code - I'd recommend taking this approach until you get more used to it. It means that the only other thing you'd need to add would be the registration for the settings writer, like:
builder.RegisterType<SettingsWriter>()
.As<ISettingsWriter>();

C# Dependency Injection Runtime (dynamic) registration

I am using VS 2017 and .NET Core.
Using Dependency Injection, I would like to register my service at runtime, dynamically. My goal is to write instances of my service that implement the service interface inside of separate assemblies. The servicename/assembly name will then be added to some sort of configuration file (or db table).
My registration code would do something like this:
var ServiceTypeName = LoadServiceAssembly(AssemblyName);
var serviceProvider = new ServiceCollection()
.AddTransient<IDILogger, "ConsoleDILogger">() // <--- Goal
.BuildServiceProvider();
var logger = serviceProvider.GetService(IDILogger);
Clearly, the AddTransient line will not work as such a method does not exist. It does, however, depict the idea. I want to register the type by a string name so that the loader application need not be recompiled everytime I add a new service type.
I cannot seem to find how to do this. Any suggestions would be welcome.
TIA
You could read configured type from the settings, load the required type via reflection and register it in service collection:
// Read from config
var assemblyPath = "...";
var typeName = "...";
var assembly = Assembly.LoadFrom(assemblyPath);
var loggerType = assembly.GetType(typeName);
var serviceProvider = new ServiceCollection()
.AddTransient(typeof(IDILogger), loggerType)
.BuildServiceProvider();
var logger = serviceProvider.GetService<IDILogger>();
Such dynamic approach will not require any recompilation if you add or reconfigure new logger.
That's obviously not possible as is, however, I used something similar to this in a project to avoid having to add each new type to the container:
var assembly = typeof(YourClass).Assembly; // I actually use Assembly.LoadFile with well-known names
var types = assembly.ExportedTypes
// filter types that are unrelated
.Where(x => x.IsClass && x.IsPublic);
foreach (var type in types)
{
// assume that we want to inject any class that implements an interface
// whose name is the type's name prefixed with I
services.AddScoped(type.GetInterface($"I{type.Name}"), type);
}
For your specific case, you could even make this shorter:
var type = assembly.ExportedTypes.First(x => x.Name == runtimeName);
services.AddScoped(typeof(IDILogger), type);
A very genuine question and with references to different answers by users, here's how I have solved in .NET 6
In program.cs added the following
//Register Service Modules to DI
builder.Services.IncludeServiceModule(builder.Configuration);
The called static function contains something like this
public static class ServiceModule
{
public static IServiceCollection IncludeServiceModule(this IServiceCollection services,
IConfiguration configuration)
{
var appServices = System.Reflection.Assembly.Load("FMDeBill.Service").GetTypes().Where(s => s.Name.EndsWith("Service") && s.IsInterface == false).ToList();
foreach (var appService in appServices)
//services.AddTransient(appService.GetInterface($"I{appService.Name}"), appService);
services.Add(new ServiceDescriptor(appService, appService, ServiceLifetime.Scoped));
return services;
}
}
The assembly name is the name of the project/assembly with services. Any service that is not an interface and ends with "Service" such as "CategoryService" is registered dynamically.
Auto-Register Dependency Injected Services in .NET Core
I wrote this method to auto-register all your services and consumer interfaces and classes at runtime for Dependency Injection by the IoC Container in .NET. All you have to do is add your interfaces and/or concrete classes to the enums lists below and the RegisterServices() method will add them for dependency injection in your .NET application. You can then add them to constructors or call them for dependency injection by .NET.
I chose to load services from an enum rather than say a JSON or other configuration file for security reasons. It also reduces dependencies and also locks the applications state, as well as forces development to lock the app to compilation. Developers must modify, add, remove service types and keep them closely coupled to the code. Changing a configuration file is too dangerous!
LET'S BEGIN
You will need to create two files then change the Startup.cs file in .NET.
Create a file called ServiceList.cs in .NET. This one is just a couple enums where you can add your list of types you want registered as services or consumers of services. If you have many classes that inherit from an Interface, just add lists of those in services. But it will accept concrete types, as well. But if you add an interface, the RegisterServices method below will locate all the child classes that implement the interface and register those, as well. The RegisterServices() method will grab them and register all your services with the IoC in .NET for you.
// ADD SERVICES YOU WANT REGISTERED
enum ServicesList
{
ISampleService,
IAnotherService,
AConcreteClassService
}
// ADD CONSUMERS YOU WANT REGISTERED
enum ConsumersList
{
MyClass1,
MyClass2,
ISomeConsumerTypes
}
Create a second class file called RegisterServices.cs. Add the following code. This is the main method that registers all the services listed in the enums above. It is called RegisterServices.cs.
// REGISTER SERVICES
// This will pull all the services you added to the ServicesList.cs
// enum and try and register them with the Services Provider in .NET
static class RegisterServices
{
// You can add the Logger here if you like.
internal static void Start(IServiceCollection services, ILogger logger = null)
{
// Extract out all service enum values into a single list.
List<string> allTypesToAdd = new List<string>();
allTypesToAdd.AddRange(Enum.GetNames(typeof(ServicesList)).ToList());
allTypesToAdd.AddRange(Enum.GetNames(typeof(ConsumersList)).ToList());
// For now I am just getting the active running assembly
Assembly assembly = Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly();
IEnumerable<TypeInfo> assemblyTypes = assembly.DefinedTypes;
List<string> missingEnumTypes = new List<string>();
bool isTypeFound = false;
// Loop through all services in the collection.
// If your service type is not listed, add it.
foreach (string typeToAdd in allTypesToAdd)
{
// Verify the enum type to add to the service collection exists in the application.
isTypeFound = false;
foreach (TypeInfo type in assemblyTypes)
{
if (type.Name == typeToAdd)
{
if (type.IsInterface)
{
// Add the Interface and any concrete classes
// that are implementations of the parent interface.
var childOfInterface = assembly.GetTypes().Where(t => type.AsType().IsAssignableFrom(t));
foreach (Type c in childOfInterface)
{
if (typeToAdd != c.Name)
{
// For now this just assumes you need a request
// scoped service lifetime services. Change as needed.
services.TryAddScoped(type.AsType(), c);
logger?.LogInformation(LogEventIDs.Information_General_ID, "INFORMATION: A new Service Class Was Added: services.TryAddScoped(" + typeToAdd + "," + c.Name + ")");
}
}
} else {
// Only add the concrete class
// For now just use scoped service lifetime
services.TryAddScoped(type.AsType());
logger?.LogInformation(LogEventIDs.Information_General_ID, "INFORMATION: A new Service Class Was Added: services.TryAddScoped(" + typeToAdd + ")");
}
isTypeFound = true;
break;
}
}
// If users added types in the enum lists
// thats not found, flag as a warning!
if (!isTypeFound)
{
missingEnumTypes.Add(typeToAdd);
}
}
// If a bad enum service name was added, log that as a warning.
if (missingEnumTypes.Count > 0)
{
string items = string.Empty;
foreach (string s in missingEnumTypes)
{
if (items != string.Empty) items += " | ";
items += s;
}
logger?.LogWarning(LogEventIDs.Warning_General_ID, "WARNING: These Types/Interfaces/Classes added to Services were not found in the application >>> " + items);
}
}
}
Register Services consumes the enum list of Services and Consumers above.
The last step is to call the method above inside your Startup.cs .NET file in Core. Add RegisterServices.Start() static method call with your ConfigureServices class inside Startup.cs in the root of your .NET Core application. I also add the logger as a parameter but this version just use the services parameter. "services" is whatever the parameter is in your
ConfigureServices method in Startup.cs:
RegisterServices.Start(services);
HOW TO USE DEPENDENCY INJECTION
After you run RegisterServices in your .NET application and Startup.cs calls it, all your services (and child classes derived from interfaces) are now registered!
To call a Service and have it auto-implemented when you instantiate a class in .NET appears to be inconsistent. The IoC Container will auto-inject all constructor services in MVC Controllers, for example, but NOT regular classes. To solve that I recommend you try and inject everything into your controllers, then use the IServiceProvider in regular class constructors to help you auto-inject all other classes with the services they need (see below).
If you are in ASP.NET Core, your best strategy is to ALWAYS add each service to your controller's constructor using interfaces. You can then have full access to every service you need or any service a child object inside the controller might need. But there will be times you have classes you call outside the controllers that inject services but are not auto-injected. So below are some examples of how to do that and still honor the dependency injection model.
Note: If you are an expert at this, please suggest below in comments how I can improve on this idea, as this is the best model I have for now that is simple and easy to use.
// HOW TO USE SERVICES?
// CONTROLLERS (Web Applications)
// Always inject the services you need into the controller's constructor.
// The IoC Container in .NET always auto-injects these objects
// for you and are 100% ready to access. If using ASP.NET, always use the
// constructor of the controller to inject services.
public class HomeController : BaseController
{
private readonly ISampleService _myservice;
public HomeController(ISampleService myservice){
_myservice = myservice;
}
// You can now access your "_myservice" in any action method of the controller
}
// NON-CONTROLLERS and NON-INJECTED CONSTRUCTORS
// If you cant inject the service object into an ASP.NET Controller
// but still need to instantiate the object, your best alternative
// is to inject the ServiceProvider into your Controller or Class
// constructor first. IoC auto-injects the service collection
// so you can now access it to create child objects you can
// tell .NET to auto-inject with their own services when created
// using the registered services in your enum as an example.
public MyClass (IServiceProvider myservice) {
// Here are 3 ways to force the IoC to auto-inject your dependencies
var obj1 = myservice.GetService<SampleService>();
var obj2 = myservice.GetService(SampleService) as ISampleService;
var obj3 = myservice.GetRequiredService(SampleService) as ISampleService;
var obj4 = (SampleService)myservice.GetService(typeof(SampleService));
}
Below is one of the Service Interface types in the enum above and the child classes that got registered which are now available to use as services in the code above after running the RegisterServices call:
// SERVICE INTERFACE
public interface ISampleService
{
void Message(string message);
}
// SERVICE CONCRETE CLASS
class SampleService : ISampleService
{
public void Message(string message)
{
Console.WriteLine($"{message}");
}
}
// SERVICE CONCRETE CLASS
class AnotherSampleService : ISampleService
{
public void Message(string message)
{
Console.WriteLine($"{message}");
}
}
You can use factory to achieve that.
services.AddScoped(provider =>
{
//Resolve some service at runtime.
var aService = provider.GetService<AServiceType>();
//Any synchronous logic here
return new MyDynamicService();
});

Factory Pattern with Open Generics

In ASP.NET Core, one of the things you can do with Microsoft's dependency injection framework is bind "open generics" (generic types unbound to a concrete type) like so:
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services) {
services.AddSingleton(typeof(IRepository<>), typeof(Repository<>))
}
You can also employ the factory pattern to hydrate dependencies. Here's a contrived example:
public interface IFactory<out T> {
T Provide();
}
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services) {
services.AddTransient(typeof(IFactory<>), typeof(Factory<>));
services.AddSingleton(
typeof(IRepository<Foo>),
p => p.GetRequiredService<IFactory<IRepository<Foo>>().Provide()
);
}
However, I have not been able to figure out how to combine the two concepts together. It seems like it would start with something like this, but I need the concrete type that is being used to hydrate an instance of IRepository<>.
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services) {
services.AddTransient(typeof(IFactory<>), typeof(Factory<>));
services.AddSingleton(
typeof(IRepository<>),
provider => {
// Say the IServiceProvider is trying to hydrate
// IRepository<Foo> when this lambda is invoked.
// In that case, I need access to a System.Type
// object which is IRepository<Foo>.
// i.e.: repositoryType = typeof(IRepository<Foo>);
// If I had that, I could snag the generic argument
// from IRepository<Foo> and hydrate the factory, like so:
var modelType = repositoryType.GetGenericArguments()[0];
var factoryType = typeof(IFactory<IRepository<>>).MakeGenericType(modelType);
var factory = (IFactory<object>)p.GetRequiredService(factoryType);
return factory.Provide();
}
);
}
If I try to use the Func<IServiceProvider, object> functor with an open generic, I get this ArgumentException with the message Open generic service type 'IRepository<T>' requires registering an open generic implementation type. from the dotnet CLI. It doesn't even get to the lambda.
Is this type of binding possible with Microsoft's dependency injection framework?
The net.core dependency does not allow you to provide a factory method when registering an open generic type, but you can work around this by providing a type that will implement the requested interface, but internally it will act as a factory. A factory in disguise:
services.AddSingleton(typeof(IMongoCollection<>), typeof(MongoCollectionFactory<>)); //this is the important part
services.AddSingleton(typeof(IRepository<>), typeof(Repository<>))
public class Repository : IRepository {
private readonly IMongoCollection _collection;
public Repository(IMongoCollection collection)
{
_collection = collection;
}
// .. rest of the implementation
}
//and this is important as well
public class MongoCollectionFactory<T> : IMongoCollection<T> {
private readonly _collection;
public RepositoryFactoryAdapter(IMongoDatabase database) {
// do the factory work here
_collection = database.GetCollection<T>(typeof(T).Name.ToLowerInvariant())
}
public T Find(string id)
{
return collection.Find(id);
}
// ... etc. all the remaining members of the IMongoCollection<T>,
// you can generate this easily with ReSharper, by running
// delegate implementation to a new field refactoring
}
When the container resolves the MongoCollectionFactory it will know what type T is and will create the collection correctly. Then we take that created collection save it internally, and delegate all calls to it. ( We are mimicking this=factory.Create() which is not allowed in csharp. :))
Update:
As pointed out by Kristian Hellang the same pattern is used by ASP.NET Logging
public class Logger<T> : ILogger<T>
{
private readonly ILogger _logger;
public Logger(ILoggerFactory factory)
{
_logger = factory.CreateLogger(TypeNameHelper.GetTypeDisplayName(typeof(T)));
}
void ILogger.Log<TState>(...)
{
_logger.Log(logLevel, eventId, state, exception, formatter);
}
}
original discussion here:
https://twitter.com/khellang/status/839120286222012416
See this issue on the dotnet (5) runtime git.
This will add support to register open generics via a factory.
I was dissatisfied with the existing solutions as well.
Here is a full solution, using the built-in container, that supports everything we need:
Simple dependencies.
Complex dependencies (requiring the IServiceProvider to be resolved).
Configuration data (such as connection strings).
We will register a proxy of the type that we really want to use. The proxy simply inherits from the intended type, but gets the "difficult" parts (complex dependencies and configuration) through a separately registered Options type.
Since the Options type is non-generic, it is easy to customize as usual.
public static class RepositoryExtensions
{
/// <summary>
/// A proxy that injects data based on a registered Options type.
/// As long as we register the Options with exactly what we need, we are good to go.
/// That's easy, since the Options are non-generic!
/// </summary>
private class ProxyRepository<T> : Repository<T>
{
public ProxyRepository(Options options, ISubdependency simpleDependency)
: base(
// A simple dependency is injected to us automatically - we only need to register it
simpleDependency,
// A complex dependency comes through the non-generic, carefully registered Options type
options?.ComplexSubdependency ?? throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(options)),
// Configuration data comes through the Options type as well
options.ConnectionString)
{
}
}
public static IServiceCollection AddRepositories(this ServiceCollection services, string connectionString)
{
// Register simple subdependencies (to be automatically resolved)
services.AddSingleton<ISubdependency, Subdependency>();
// Put all regular configuration on the Options instance
var optionObject = new Options(services)
{
ConnectionString = connectionString ?? throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(connectionString))
};
// Register the Options instance
// On resolution, last-minute, add the complex subdependency to the options as well (with access to the service provider)
services.AddSingleton(serviceProvider => optionObject.WithSubdependency(ResolveSubdependency(serviceProvider)));
// Register the open generic type
// All dependencies will be resolved automatically: the simple dependency, and the Options (holding everything else)
services.AddSingleton(typeof(IRepository<>), typeof(ProxyRepository<>));
return services;
// Local function that resolves the subdependency according to complex logic ;-)
ISubdependency ResolveSubdependency(IServiceProvider serviceProvider)
{
return new Subdependency();
}
}
internal sealed class Options
{
internal IServiceCollection Services { get; }
internal ISubdependency ComplexSubdependency { get; set; }
internal string ConnectionString { get; set; }
internal Options(IServiceCollection services)
{
this.Services = services ?? throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(services));
}
/// <summary>
/// Fluently sets the given subdependency, allowing to options object to be mutated and returned as a single expression.
/// </summary>
internal Options WithSubdependency(ISubdependency subdependency)
{
this.ComplexSubdependency = subdependency ?? throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(subdependency));
return this;
}
}
}
I also don't understand the point of your lambda expression so I'll explain to you my way of doing it.
I suppose what you wish is to reach what is explained in the article you shared
This allowed me to inspect the incoming request before supplying a dependency into the ASP.NET Core dependency injection system
My need was to inspect a custom header in the HTTP request to determine which customer is requesting my API. I could then a bit later in the pipeline decide which implementation of my IDatabaseRepository (File System or Entity Framework linked to a SQL Database) to provide for this unique request.
So I start by writing a middleware
public class ContextSettingsMiddleware
{
private readonly RequestDelegate _next;
public ContextSettingsMiddleware(RequestDelegate next, IServiceProvider serviceProvider)
{
_next = next;
}
public async Task Invoke(HttpContext context, IServiceProvider serviceProvider, IHostingEnvironment env, IContextSettings contextSettings)
{
var customerName = context.Request.Headers["customer"];
var customer = SettingsProvider.Instance.Settings.Customers.FirstOrDefault(c => c.Name == customerName);
contextSettings.SetCurrentCustomer(customer);
await _next.Invoke(context);
}
}
My SettingsProvider is just a singleton that provides me the corresponding customer object.
To let our middleware access this ContextSettings we first need to register it in ConfigureServices in Startup.cs
var contextSettings = new ContextSettings();
services.AddSingleton<IContextSettings>(contextSettings);
And in the Configure method we register our middleware
app.UseMiddleware<ContextSettingsMiddleware>();
Now that our customer is accessible from elsewhere let's write our Factory.
public class DatabaseRepositoryFactory
{
private IHostingEnvironment _env { get; set; }
public Func<IServiceProvider, IDatabaseRepository> DatabaseRepository { get; private set; }
public DatabaseRepositoryFactory(IHostingEnvironment env)
{
_env = env;
DatabaseRepository = GetDatabaseRepository;
}
private IDatabaseRepository GetDatabaseRepository(IServiceProvider serviceProvider)
{
var contextSettings = serviceProvider.GetService<IContextSettings>();
var currentCustomer = contextSettings.GetCurrentCustomer();
if(SOME CHECK)
{
var currentDatabase = currentCustomer.CurrentDatabase as FileSystemDatabase;
var databaseRepository = new FileSystemDatabaseRepository(currentDatabase.Path);
return databaseRepository;
}
else
{
var currentDatabase = currentCustomer.CurrentDatabase as EntityDatabase;
var dbContext = new CustomDbContext(currentDatabase.ConnectionString, _env.EnvironmentName);
var databaseRepository = new EntityFrameworkDatabaseRepository(dbContext);
return databaseRepository;
}
}
}
In order to use serviceProvider.GetService<>() method you will need to include the following using in your CS file
using Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection;
Finally we can use our Factory in ConfigureServices method
var databaseRepositoryFactory = new DatabaseRepositoryFactory(_env);
services.AddScoped<IDatabaseRepository>(databaseRepositoryFactory.DatabaseRepository);
So every single HTTP request my DatabaseRepository will may be different depending of several parameters. I could use a file system or a SQL Database and I can get the proper database corresponding to my customer. (Yes I have multiple databases per customer, don't try to understand why)
I simplified it as possible, my code is in reality more complex but you get the idea (I hope). Now you can modify this to fit your needs.

Dependency Injection in Model classes (entities)

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; }

Categories