What is the right approach to use dependency injection when I want to also pass in a parameter to the constructor of a class?
For example, here I want an IApplicationService to be injected, but I also want to pass in an application id:
public class ApplicationViewModel
{
private readonly IApplicationService _applicationService;
private readonly int _applicationId;
public ApplicationViewModel(IApplicationService applicationService, int applicationId)
{
_applicationService = applicationService;
_applicationId = applicationId;
}
}
Currently, I'm using constructor injection on the controller and passing this on:
public class HomeController : Controller
{
private readonly IApplicationService _applicationService;
public HomeController(IApplicationService applicationService)
{
_applicationService = applicationService;
}
public ActionResult Application(int applicationId)
{
return View(new ApplicationViewModel(_applicationService, applicationId));
}
}
This works, but seems a bit ugly. The controller could have lots of action methods, each of which could require lots of services. The controller would end up getting a whole bunch of stuff injected that would mostly not be used. Also, I would rather be able to change what the view model needs injected without changing the controller.
I also tried using property injection on the view model, but it didn't work in MVC5 and property injection appears to be generally regarded as a Bad Idea™.
I'm sure the problem is that I'm not structuring the code properly. Any ideas?
Related
Seems crazy that something like this is causing me such a headache. But here it is:
How do you use the built-in dependency injection for net core for a non-controller class? Please provide an example with includes instantiation.
Thanks.
Just make the class a service.
In startup.cs
services.AddScoped<AccountBusinessLayer>();
Then in controller, same as you do for other services:
private readonly AccountBusinessLayer _ABL;
Include in constructor as you do for other services:
public AccountController(
UserManager<ApplicationUser> userManager,
SignInManager<ApplicationUser> signInManager,IOptions<IdentityCookieOptions> identityCookieOptions,
IEmailSender emailSender,
ISmsSender smsSender,
ILoggerFactory loggerFactory,
RoleManager<IdentityRole> roleManager,
AccountBusinessLayer ABL
)
{
_userManager = userManager;
_signInManager = signInManager;
_externalCookieScheme = identityCookieOptions.Value.ExternalCookieAuthenticationScheme;
_emailSender = emailSender;
_smsSender = smsSender;
_logger = loggerFactory.CreateLogger<AccountController>();
_roleManager = roleManager;
_ABL = ABL;
}
You can easily define a static class with one property like:
public static class StaticServiceProvider
{
public static IServiceProvider Provider { get; set; }
}
after defined class you have to scope the service in the Startup.ConfigureServices method:
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
//TODO: ...
services.AddScoped<IUnitOfWork, HttpUnitOfWork>();
services.AddSingleton<ISomeInterface, ISomeImplementation>();
}
then inside the Startup.Configure method on startup you can set the provider as static class property:
public void Configure(IApplicationBuilder app, ...)
{
StaticServiceProvider.Provider = app.ApplicationServices;
//TODO: ...
}
Now you can easily call StaticServiceProvider.Provider.GetService method almost everywhere in your application:
var unitOfWork = (IUnitOfWork)StaticServiceProvider.Provider.GetService(typeof(IUnitOfWork));
I'm not sure this is the best answer, but the way I decided to do it is to do the following:
1) Per the answer by #BrunoLM at on this question Resolving instances with ASP.NET Core DI suggested by #SystemCrash, I created a new project called UnderstandingDependencyInjection and pasted in the code examples.
Important: What I describe next see next will not make sense unless you visit the referenced link above (#1). What you see below is a partial solution that builds on the answer another user provided in a another SO question.
2) Next, I created another class called OtherService. I added a method DoSomething() that took a dependency on the TestService.
3) In the constructor of OtherService, I requested IServiceProvider in order to get a concrete implementation of ITestService so I could call its GenerateRandom() method.
4) Back in the HomeController.cs, I merely passed along the IServiceProvider reference to the constructor of OtherService.
So, this is what I have:
OtherService.cs
using System;
using Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection;
namespace UnderstandingDependencyInjection.Services
{
public class OtherService
{
private readonly ITestService _testService;
public OtherService(IServiceProvider serviceProvider)
{
_testService = serviceProvider.GetService<ITestService>();
}
public int DoSomething()
{
var rnd = _testService.GenerateRandom();
return rnd * 2;
}
}
}
HomeController.cs
using Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection;
using UnderstandingDependencyInjection.Services;
namespace UnderstandingDependencyInjection.Controllers
{
public class HomeController : Controller
{
private readonly ITestService _testService;
private readonly IServiceProvider _serviceProvider;
public HomeController(IServiceProvider serviceProvider)
{
_serviceProvider = serviceProvider;
_testService = serviceProvider.GetService<ITestService>();
}
public IActionResult Index()
{
// This works!
// var rnd = _testService.GenerateRandom();
// What if I need to reference the TestService
// from another service? I.e., OtherService?
var otherService = new OtherService(_serviceProvider);
var rnd = otherService.DoSomething();
ViewBag.RandomNumber = rnd;
return View();
}
So, to summarize, the key to this technique is to pass around the concrete reference of IServiceProvider that your controller receives ... passing from the controller into any other custom classes that will also need any services that are registered into ASP.NET Core's DI framework.
What about static methods that depend on the TestService?
But, I may not want / need to create an instance of OtherService. I may want to merely call a method statically, but that method takes a dependency on a service managed by ASP.NET Core MVC's Dependency Injection framework. What now?
In this case, the best I can figure out, you would need to pass in the reference ON THE METHOD CALL to the static method. It looks nasty, and I'm hoping there's a more elegant way ... but here's what I figured out.
5) Building on the previous steps (above) I added a new class called StaticService.
6) I created a method DoSomething that takes IServiceProvider as a parameter.
7) I use the concrete instance of the IServiceProvider to get a concrete instance of the ITestService. I use this to call GenerateRandom().
8) From the controller, call the StaticService.DoSomething() method passing it the concrete instance of IServiceProvider that I'm holding on to.
StaticService.cs
using Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection;
namespace UnderstandingDependencyInjection.Services
{
public class StaticService
{
// No constructors
public static int DoSomething(IServiceProvider serviceProvider)
{
var testService = serviceProvider.GetService<ITestService>();
var rnd = testService.GenerateRandom();
return rnd * 3;
}
}
}
HomeController.cs
public IActionResult Index()
{
// This works!
// var rnd = _testService.GenerateRandom();
// What if I need to reference the TestService
// from another service? I.e., OtherService?
//var otherService = new OtherService(_serviceProvider);
//var rnd = otherService.DoSomething();
// What if I need to reference the TestService
// from another service with a STATIC method?
// Best I can tell, you have to pass the
// ServiceProvider in on the method call.
var rnd = StaticService.DoSomething(_serviceProvider);
ViewBag.RandomNumber = rnd;
return View();
}
But isn't passing around ServiceProvider an anti-pattern?
In short, yes. You wind up passing ServiceProvider around everywhere in code. Some would argue that this gives every controller and ever class access to every service registered in ASP.NET Core's DI. That's true, and that seems bad.
But what are your alternatives? Should every class that has a dependency on your service ALSO be defined as a service and registered with the DI? In other words, should I create IOtherService, and then pass it a concrete ITestService in its constructor?
I could do that, HOWEVER now my controller's constructor needs BOTH ITestService AND IOtherService. In other words, in order to work correctly, the Controller needs to know how OtherService does its job and that it uses ITestService internally. That seems bad, too.
What to do?
What's the Best Answer?
Frankly, I think the best answer is found here:
Passing Services using Dependency Injection and Factory Pattern in ASP.NET
#Steven says in his answer:
It does mean however that you might need to move away from the built-in DI container of ASP.NET Core to a more feature rich DI library, because the built-in container is not capable of making a context aware registration for ILogger while having the library auto-wire other constructor dependencies as well.
There are actually many ways to inject your dependency, the most common one you will find on controllers. There is also this variant
var someService = (ISomeService)HttpContext.RequestServices.GetService(typeof(ISomeService));
In my ASP.Net Core MVC 6 solution I have two sets of controllers. One set contains the webpages with their regular views. Another set contains the API controllers.
To avoid duplicating db logic the web controllers are using the API controllers. Currently I am creating an instance of the required controller manually by handing it a DbContext as constructor argument. This is the DbContext given to web controller by dependency injection.
But whenever I add another constructor parameter to the API controller I need to modify all web controllers that use this API controller.
How can I use the dependency injection system builtin to ASP.Net 5 to create an instance of the required API controller for me? Then it would fill in the required constructor parameters automatically.
One solution could be to move the db logic from the API controllers to a separate layer and call that from both API and web controllers. This would not solve my problem since the new layer would still need the same parameters and I'm not fan of the unnecessary wiring.
Another solution would be to have the web controllers access the API through a web call, but that just adds complexity to the app.
Today I am doing this:
public IActionResult Index()
{
using (var foobarController = new Areas.Api.Controllers.FoobarController(
// All of these has to be in the constructor of this controller so they can be passed on to the ctor of api controller
_dbContext, _appEnvironment,
_userManager, _roleManager,
_emailSender, _smsSender))
{
var model = new IndexViewModel();
model.Foo = foobarController.List(new FoobarRequest() { Foo = true, Bar = false });
model.Bar = foobarController.List(new FoobarRequest() { Foo = false, Bar = true });
return View(model);
}
}
And I am hoping for something like this:
(This example does not work.)
using (var foobarController = CallContextServiceLocator.Locator.ServiceProvider.GetService<Areas.Api.Controllers.FoobarController>())
{
var model = new IndexViewModel();
model.Foo = foobarController.List(new FoobarRequest() { Foo = true, Bar = false });
model.Bar = foobarController.List(new FoobarRequest() { Foo = false, Bar = true });
return View(model);
}
How can I use the dependency injection system builtin to ASP.Net 5 to create an instance of the required API controller for me?
In your Startup.cs can tell the MVC to register all your controllers as services.
services.AddMvc().AddControllersAsServices();
Then you can simply inject the desired controller in your other controller via the DI mechanism and invoke its action method.
Don't do it. Move that logic to another component that gets shared between the 2 controllers. The controller is dispatched to by the framework as a result of an HTTP call, its not your public API surface. In general, your controllers should be used as a the place where the HTTP request is transformed into business objects. Operations on those objects should be delegate to another layer (especially if it needs to be used from more than one place in your application).
To be able to use a controller from another controller you need to:
Register the controller in Startup.cs ConfigureServices: services.AddTransient <Areas.Api.Controllers.FoobarController, Areas.Api.Controllers.FoobarController>();
You must pass the controller you want to access as a ctor parameter into the main controller.
If you need to access local properties in the controller such as User or Url there are two ways to do this.
The first way is to use DI to get an instance of IHttpContextAccessor to access User and IUrlHelper to access Url objects:
public class FoobarController : Controller
{
private readonly ApplicationDbContext _dbContext;
private readonly IHttpContextAccessor _httpContextAccessor;
private readonly IUrlHelper _urlHelper;
public FoobarController(ApplicationDbContext dbContext, IHttpContextAccessor httpContextAccessor, IUrlHelper _urlHelper, [...])
{
_dbContext = dbContext;
_httpContextAccessor = httpContextAccessor;
_urlHelper = urlHelper;
}
public FoobarResponse List(FoobarRequest request)
{
var userId = _httpContextAccessor.HttpContext.User.GetUserId();
var response = new FoobarResponse();
response.List = _dbContext.Foobars.Where(f => f.UserId == userId).ToList();
response.Thumb =
return response;
}
}
The second way is to set it in the calling controller:
public class HomeController : Controller
{
private Areas.Api.Controllers.FoobarController _foobarController;
public HomeController(Areas.Api.Controllers.FoobarController foobarController)
{
_foobarController = foobarController;
}
private void InitControllers()
{
// We can't set this at Ctor because we don't have our local copy yet
// Access to Url
_foobarController.Url = Url;
// Access to User
_foobarController.ActionContext = ActionContext;
// For more references see https://github.com/aspnet/Mvc/blob/6.0.0-rc1/src/Microsoft.AspNet.Mvc.ViewFeatures/Controller.cs
// Note: This will change in RC2
}
public IActionResult Index()
{
InitControllers();
var model = new IndexViewModel();
model.Foo = _foobarController.List(new FoobarRequest() { Foo = true, Bar = false });
model.Bar = _foobarController.List(new FoobarRequest() { Foo = false, Bar = true });
return View(model);
}
}
The source code for ASP.Net Core MVC6 RC1 Controller can be found here. It is however undergoing heavy rewrite for RC2 and with it the properties that has to be copied to get access to User and Url will change.
#B12Toaster is correct for MVC but if you only use ApiController you should do it like this:
services.AddControllers().AddControllersAsServices();
Why would your new layer need wiring up? Why not take in an object into both controllers and call a method on that object. The DI container could resolve the dependencies of this new object without duplicated wiring couldn't it?
ie you could have this:
public class MvcController
{
SharedComponent sharedComponent;
public MvcController(SharedComponent sharedComponent)
{
this.sharedComponent = sharedComponent;
}
public IActionResult Index()
{
var model = new IndexViewModel();
model.Foo = shredComponent.List(new FoobarRequest() { Foo = true, Bar = false });
model.Bar = shredComponent.List(new FoobarRequest() { Foo = false, Bar = true });
return View(model);
}
}
//Repeat this for the API controller
public class SharedComponent
{
public SharedComponent(DBContext dbContext, AppEnvironment appEnvironment, UserManager userManager, RoleManager roleManager,
EmailSender emailSender, SmsSender smsSender)
{
...Store in fields for later usage
}
}
I'd have to agree with others that injecting the controller may not be the best route. Mostly because it marries the business logic with ASP.Net instead of treating it like an IO device like, in my opinion, it should be.
Let's say we have an interface that looks like this:
public interface ICalculator {
int Add(int left, int right);
}
and we have an implementation that stores the business logic:
public class MyCalculator : ICalculator {
public int Add(int left, int right) => left + right;
}
This implementation can be used as a background service, within the same process as a WPF application, or as an ASP.NET WebAPI controller. It would look something like this:
[ApiController]
[Route("api/{controller}")]
public void CalculatorController : Controller, ICalculator {
private readonly ICalculator _calculator;
public CalculatorController(ICalculator calc) => _calculator = calc;
[Route("Add")]
public int Add(int left, int right) => _calculator.Add(left, right);
}
If that controller has a dependency on a repository you can inject that interface too. Personally I like defining a collection of repositories (like IUserRepository for example) and injecting only what is needed instead of the entire DbContext.
public CalculatorController(ICalculator calculator, IDbContext db) { }
There's nothing wrong with a controller depending on more than just the thing it is decorating. Just make sure you have a set of tests that assert various things. For example you could assert that when a particular controller method is called the particular method on the other interface is also called.
Personally I find this approach a better fit. It's okay to use certain technologies but they should be kept at arm's length from the business rules. A developer should be able to take the business rules that govern a particular part of the code and switch from a WCF service to ASP.NET WebAPI trivially.
I've personally been a part of a couple projects where we had to switch from one database technology to another (SQL Server to CouchDB) and one where our micro-services needed to be running as restful Web API services instead of Windows services. If you architect things this way those types of projects become relatively trivial compared to how things are normally composed.
I'd like to create a ViewHelper to localize my ASP.NET MVC application. Something like this:
public class Translator
{
private readonly ITranslationRepository _repo;
public Translator(ITranslationRepository repo)
{
_repo = repo;
}
public static string Translate(TranslationEnum translationEnum)
{
return _repo.GetTranslation(translationEnum, Session.LanguageId);
}
}
Usage in a (Razor) View looks like this:
<p>#Translator.Translate(TranslationEnum.WelcomeMessage)</p>
Now the problem is of course, I cannot make the Translate method static, because I need to access the instance variable _repo.
How can I inject the repository into a ViewHelper so I can use it in a View like above?
The responsibility of the view is just to transform the data that comes back from the controller to a HTML structure. Views are hard (to impossible) to test automatically, so best is to keep them as dumb as possible.
Instead of using the Translator in your view, inject it into your controller and let the controller call the Translator. This solves a range of problems:
It keeps the view simple.
It improves maintainability.
It improves testability.
It improves the verifiability of your object graphs (because you don't fall back on static method calls or the Service Locator anti-pattern).
Long story short, add a property to the controller's view model and return that to the view. Example:
public class HomeController : Controller {
private readonly ITranslator translator;
public HomeController(ITranslator translator) {
this.translator = translator
}
public ActionResult Index() {
this.View(new HomeViewModel {
WelcomeMessage = this.translator.Translate(TranslationEnum.WelcomeMessage)
});
}
}
And your view can look as follows:
#model HomeViewModel
<p>#Model.WelcomeMessage</p>
first of all, the intention of your design is wrong because it violates the single responsibility principal. Why is a translator dependent on repository?
secondly, why do you need a translator, you can use asp.net globalization?
click me We should not reinvent the wheel.
thirdly, all the html helpers are extension methods which have to be static.
so my suggestion is if you have to use translator, please refactor the Translator class, decouple the repository from it then create a extension methods from there.
or you can use globalization, it sounds horrible to start with but trust me it's not as hard as it looks.
public class Translator
{
private static ITranslationRepository _repo;
public static ITranslationRepository Repo
{
get { /*check null here before return*/ return _repo; } set { _repo = Repo; }
}
public Translator()
{
}
public static string Translate(TranslationEnum translationEnum)
{
return _repo.GetTranslation(translationEnum, Session.LanguageId);
}
}
I've got a problem with a bog standard three tier project using MVC that I'm trying to use Ninject with. I've got a MemberRepository:
public class MemberRepository : IMemberRepository{
public bool Save(Member member){
//saves member
}
}
I then have my Service Layer:
public class MemberService : IMemberService{
public bool Register(string email){
//Do Stuff & Populate Member Object
_repo.Save(member);
}
}
Given I'll be using Ninject what is the best way of me setting up my AccountController. Should I pass in the MemberService to the constructor like so:
public class AccountController : Controller
{
IMemberService _memberService;
public AccountController(IMemberService memberService)
{
_memberService = memberService;
}
}
Or pass in the repository:
public class AccountController : Controller
{
IMemberService _memberService;
public AccountController(IMemberRepository memberRepo)
{
_memberService = new MemberService(memberRepo);
}
}
Or Both?
I originally had just a repository (no service layer) but I've had to implement a service layer and I'm not sure how I'd handle the 'dependency' when registering the kernal in my NinjectWebCommon.cs file. Which was originally just this:
kernel.Bind<IMemberRepository>().To<SqlMemberRepository>();
But now I'm wondering if I need to register the IMemberService and have the repo as some kind of parameter.
:s Feeling kind of lost. Hope I'm making sense and someone can help out.
I've never used Ninject, I've been using Unity, but the same principles exist so hopefully this might help.
The service layer is the thing that is exposed to the controller - the controller needs to know nothing about the underlying repository. The flow is as follows, and each layer doesn't know about the layers above it:
Controller -> Service > Repository
So I would go with option 1, and then inject the repository into the constructor of the service.
public class MemberService : IMemberService {
private readonly IMemberRepository _repo;
[Inject]
public MemberService (IMemberRepository repo){
this._repo = repo;
}
public bool Register(string email){
//Do Stuff & Populate Member Object
_repo.Save(member);
}
}
and
public class AccountController : Controller
{
private readonly IMemberService _memberService;
[Inject]
public AccountController(IMemberService memberService)
{
_memberService = memberService;
}
}
That example obviously uses constructor injection but you can use property/field injection if you want instead. When you register your dependencies, you'll have to register both:
kernel.Bind<IMemberRepository>().To<SqlMemberRepository>();
kernel.Bind<IMemberService>().To<MemberService>();
I am following "ASP.Net MVC 3" by Steven Sanderson and Adam Freeman, and at one point they define ControllerFactory. The exposed interface is for creating controllers, and what is injected into them (like classes providing data) is black box (for outside world).
I am at the point, that I don't really want to get any controller, but the binding set for controller -- namely class providing data.
I could add another method for controller factory (like GetBinding) and it would work, but would it be the right way to do it?
Just to focus on something. I have IDataProvider and two classes -- MockupProvider and ProviderForReal. I would like to set it once, that for now whenever I need IDataProvider I will get MockupProvider. This is set up (by me) in controller factory.
And I would like to retrieve what I set up in most elegant way, so I won't bind again interface-class again. Is adding such method -- GetBinding -- to controller factor a good pattern?
I am not constructing the controller, I need binding controllers use.
In other words...
There is controller factory. Inside there are defined some bindings. I have to use retrieve them (binding, not controller). Technically I could do this in several ways:
take a look at the code, look at specific binding, and use the the bound type (hardcoding it) somewhere else
add public method to controller factory GetBinding
...?
What is the right way?
Update
My controller factory:
public class NinjectControllerFactory : DefaultControllerFactory
{
private IKernel ninject_kernel;
public NinjectControllerFactory()
{
ninject_kernel = new StandardKernel();
AddBindings();
}
private void AddBindings()
{
ninject_kernel.Bind<IBookRepository>().To<DataManagement.Concrete.EFBookRepository>();
// ninject_kernel.Bind<IBookRepository>().ToConstant(DataManagement.Mocks.Mocks.BookRepository);
}
public T GetBinding<T>()
{
return ninject_kernel.Get<T>();
}
protected override IController GetControllerInstance(System.Web.Routing.RequestContext requestContext, Type controllerType)
{
if (controllerType == null)
return null;
else
return (IController)ninject_kernel.Get(controllerType);
}
}
I'm trying to answer your questions following the comments. If it won't be suitable for you I'm prepared to delete it.
So in my ASP.NET MVC applications I'm using ninject and its mvc extension to inject dependencies to my controllers (and underlying services and repositories).
Global.asax
public class MvcApplication : Ninject.Web.Mvc.NinjectHttpApplication
{
/// this is here only to see that NinjectHttpApplication uses its own ControllerFactory, which is supposed to create your controllers with dependencies injected
protected override Ninject.Web.Mvc.NinjectControllerFactory CreateControllerFactory()
{
return base.CreateControllerFactory();
}
protected override IKernel CreateKernel()
{
var kernel = new StandardKernel();
// here you can configure your bindings according to actual requirements
kernel.Bind<IDataProvider>().To<ProviderForReal>().InRequestScope();
kernel.Bind<IDataService>().To<RealDataService().InRequestScope();
return kernel;
}
}
Controller
public class MyController : Controller
{
private readonly IDataProvider dataService;
// i will get injected an IDataProvider according to my actual configuration
public MyController(IDataService dataService)
{
this.dataService = dataService;
}
}
IDataService
public class RealDataService: IDataService{
private readonly IDataProvider dataProvider;
public RealDataService(IDataProvider dataProvider){
this.dataProvider = dataProvider;
}
}
Update
You do not need to write your own controller factory. In the code above I have put my override of CreateControllerFactory method only to show that Ninject.Web.Mvc.NinjectHttpApplication implicitly overrides this method and uses its own NinjectControllerFactory implmentation which will resolve dependencies for you (even if that dependencies are indirect - as you can see in my updated code => Ninject will resolve it for you because it will see that MyController needs IDataService and will look into bindings and will see that there is binding to RealDataService, but it has only constructor with dependency on IDataProvider. So it will look again to bindings and will see that IDataProvider is bound to ProviderForReal than it will create ProviderForReal inject it to ReadDataService and than RealDataService to MyController).