We have an OpenRasta service, and we'd like to use media types to version our resources. We'll have a different set of DTOs for each new version, distinguishable by namespace. For each version of the DTOs, we have a corresponding media type.
So DTOs will be mapped to media types like this:
Namespace.Dto.V1.MyResource -> application/vnd.Namespace.Dto.V1.MyResource+json
Namespace.Dto.V2.MyResource -> application/vnd.Namespace.Dto.V2.MyResource+json
The repository implementation will be specific to the version of the DTOs, but the interface is generic. I would like my handler and codec to be generic as well, so I don't need to copy/paste them for each version of the DTOs. So I want my routes to look like this:
ResourceSpace.Has.ResourcesOfType<V1.MyResource>()
.AtUri("MyResource/{resourceID}")
.HandledBy<MyResourceHandler<Dto.V1.MyResource>>()
.TranscodedBy<MyResourceCodec<Dto.V1.MyResource>>()
.ForMediaType(mediaTypeMapper.GetMediaType(typeof(Dto.V1.MyResource)));
//V2 of DTOs
ResourceSpace.Has.ResourcesOfType<V2.MyResource>()
.AtUri("MyResource/{resourceID}")
.HandledBy<MyResourceHandler<Dto.V2.MyResource>>()
.TranscodedBy<MyResourceCodec<Dto.V2.MyResource>>()
.ForMediaType(mediaTypeMapper.GetMediaType(typeof(Dto.V2.MyResource)));
Should this work? Right now, it appears that my service is handling requests with MyResourceHandler<Dto.V1.MyResource> regardless of the Accept header on a GET request, for example.
Any thoughts? We could change our scheme to use URIs like /v1/MyResource/ instead of using the accept header, but it would be great to get this working.
EDIT:
I should add that part of the reason we are using media types for versioning is because this is a service for internal use, not meant to be accessible on the public web.
You're registering two resource types on the same URI, only one will get selected, there's no way to do the distinction at request time.
I don't think versioning in URIs or media types is a good idea on the web. That said, for what you want (different mediatypes), then use the same resource type and use your codec to fill-in the same type from the incoming / outgoing data. That's teh responsibility of a codec in OR, making the junction between a DTO and a media type format.
On incoming requests, we need to know what resource type you want based on the URI. If you have two different types it ought to be different resources. that said if you do the following that'll work too:
ResourceSpace.Has.ResourcesNamed("myResource").AtUri("/myResource").HandledBy<ResourceV1Handler>().And.HandledBy<ResourceV2Handler>();
ResourceSpace.Has.ResourcesOfType<MyV1Resource>().WithoutUri.TranscodedBy<V1Codec>();
ResourceSpace.Has.ResourcesOfType<MyV2Resource>().WithoutUri.TranscodedBy<V2Codec>();
you can then write
public class handler {
public object Post(MyV1Resource resource) {}
public object Post(MyV2Resource resource) {}
}
and that'll work. What you won't be able to do is implement the get in that way, as OR assumes one resource type == one URI in most instances.
As for generics, if you use an IoC container, you can register your handlers in a generic fashion (aka register typeof(IHandler<>) with typeof(Handler<>)). This means any IHandler will get resolved to Handler. You can then simply register HandledBy>() in your registration and you're done. Same applies to codecs (but then again, codecs in OR are there to deal with media type issues, not just as serialization mechanisms, as serialization in itself is evil for the web and should be used seldomly).
Related
I've read about the great capabilities of Type Providers, such as static-typing when querying JSON documents, so I can imagine that I can create what I have in my mind at the moment, with this technology.
Let's say I want to allow a consumer of my TypeProvider-library Foo a way to create a type Bar, which will have the following pre-condition for each of their methods: check the mutable state of a boolean disposed field, if it's true, throw an ObjectDisposedException.
Would this be possible? How could one define such an implementation of this high-level type creator?
A couple of years back Keith Battocchi published a project called ILBuilder. Among other things ILBuilder contains a method type provider in ILBuilder.fs that provides methods for types in mscorlib, e.g.
MethodProvider.Methods.System.Console.``WriteLine : string*obj->unit`
It is possible you could use this as a starting point for a type provider that wraps classes from another assembly and provides methods.
Another option might be to consider Ross McKinlay's Mixin Type Provider that (ab)uses F#'s Type Provider mechanism to provide meta-programming capabilities.
Yet another option might be to use PostSharp, Fody etc. to do IL weaving, or code generation via reflection to build proxy classes.
That said probably the lowest friction solution would be to create a function that checks for disposal and manually add it to each member.
For instance I have this bit of code
public class ProductService{
private IProductDataSource _dataSource = DependencyManager.Get<IProductDataSource>();
public Product Get(int id){
return _dataSource.Select(id);
}
}
I have 2 different data source:
XML file which contains the informations only in 1 language,
a SQL data base which contains the informations in many languages.
So I created 2 implementation for IProductDataSource, for for each kind of datasource.
But how do I send the required language to the SQL data source ?
I add the parameter "language" to the method "IProductDataSource.Select" even if I won't use it in the case of the XML implementation.
Inside the SQL implementation I get the language from a global state ?
I add the language to the constructor of my SQL implementation, but then I won't use my DependencyManager and handle my self the dependency injection.
Maybe my first solution is not good.
The third option is the way to go. Inject the language configuration to your SQL implementation. Also get rid of your DependencyManager ServiceLocator and use constructor injection instead.
If your application needs to work with multiple languages in a single instance I think point one is a sensible approach. If the underlying data does not provide translations for a request language then return null. There is another solution in this scenario. I'm assuming that what you have is a list of products and language translations for each product. Can you refactor your model so that you do not need to specify or asertain the langauge until you reference language specific text? The point being a product is a product regardless of the language you choose to describe it. i.e. one product instance per product, only the product id on the Datasource.Select(..) method and some other abstraction mechanism to deal with accessing the correct text translation.
If however each instance of your application is only concerned with one language set I second Mr Gloor.
First of all I need to point out that you are NOT injecting any dependencies with your example - you are depending on a service locator (DependencyManager) to get them for you. Dependency injection, simply put, is when your classes are unaware of who provides the dependencies, e.g. using a constructor, a setter, a method. As it was already mentioned in the other answers, Service locator is an anti-pattern and should be avoided. The reasons are described in this great article.
Another thing is that the settings you are mentioning, such as language or currency, seem to be localization related and would probably be better dealt with using the built-in mechanisms of your language of choice (e.g. resource files, etc).
Now, having said that, depending on how the rest of your code is structured you have several options to solve this while still using Service locator:
You could have SqlDataSource depend on some ILanguageProvider which pulls the current language from somewhere. However, with more settings like these (or if it is difficult to get current language in an isolated way) this can get messy very fast.
You could depend on IProductDataSourceFactory instead (or, if you are using C#, Func<IProductDataSource>) which would return the concrete implementation with the correct settings. Again, you need to be able to get the current language in an isolated way in order to use this.
You could go with option 1 in your question. This would be a leaky abstraction but would be the simplest to implement.
However, if you decide to get rid of service locator and start using some DI container, the best solution would be using option 3 (as it was already stated) and configuring container accordingly to provide the correct value. Some good ideas of how to do this in an elegant way can be found in the answer to this question
When registering two handlers for the same type, but with different URIs, the handler selection algorithm doesn't seem to check the uri when it determines which handler to use.
If you run the program below, you'll notice that only HandlerOne will be invoked (twice). It does not matter if I call for "/one" or "/two", the latter supposed to be handled by HandlerTwo.
Am I doing something wrong or is this something to be fixed in OpenRasta? (I'm using 2.0.3.0 btw)
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
using (InMemoryHost host = new InMemoryHost(new Configuration()))
{
host.ProcessRequest(new InMemoryRequest
{
HttpMethod = "GET",
Uri = new Uri("http://x/one")
});
host.ProcessRequest(new InMemoryRequest
{
HttpMethod = "GET",
Uri = new Uri("http://x/two")
});
}
}
}
class Configuration : IConfigurationSource
{
public void Configure()
{
using (OpenRastaConfiguration.Manual)
{
ResourceSpace.Has.ResourcesOfType(typeof(object))
.AtUri("/one").HandledBy(typeof(HandlerOne));
ResourceSpace.Has.ResourcesOfType(typeof(object))
.AtUri("/two").HandledBy(typeof(HandlerTwo));
}
}
}
class HandlerOne
{
public object Get() { return "returned from HandlerOne.Get"; }
}
class HandlerTwo
{
public object Get() { return "returned from HandlerTwo.Get"; }
}
Update
I have a feeling that I could accomplish what I want similar using UriNameHandlerMethodSelector as described on http://trac.caffeine-it.com/openrasta/wiki/Doc/Handlers/MethodSelection, but then I'd have to annotate each handler methods and also do AtUri().Named(), which looks like boilerplate to me and I'd like to avoid that. Isn't AtUri(X).HandledBy(Y) making the connection between X and Y clear?
Eugene,
You should never have multiple registrations like that on the same resource type, and you probably never need to have ResourcesOfType<object> ever associated with URIs, that'll completely screw with the resolution algorithms used in OpenRasta.
If you're mapping two different things, create two resource classes. Handlers and URIs are only associate by resource class, and if you fail at designing your resources OpenRasta will not be able to match the two, and this is by design.
If you want to persist down that route, and I really don't think you should, then you can register various URIs to have a name, and hint on each of your methods that the name ought to be handled using HttpOperation(ForUriName=blah). That piece of functionality is only there for those very, very rare scenarios where you do need to opt-out of the automatic method resolution.
Finally, as OpenRasta is a compsable framework, you shouldnt have to go and hack around existing classes, you ought to plug yourself into the framework to ensure you override the components you don't want and replace them by things you code yourself. In this case, you could simply write a contributor that replaces the handler selection with your own moel if you don't like the defaults and want an MVC-style selection system. Alternatively, if you want certain methods to be selected rather than others, you can remove the existing operation selectors and replace them (or complement them with) your own. That way you will rely on published APIs to extend OpenRasta and your code won't be broken in the future. I can't give that guarantee if you forked and hacked existing code.
As Seb explained, when you register multiple handlers with the same resource type OpenRasta treats the handlers as one large concatenated class. It therefore guesses (best way to describe it) which potential GET (or other HTTP verb) method to execute, which ever it thinks is most appropriate. This isn't going to be acceptable from the developers prospective and must be resolved.
I have in my use of OpenRasta needed to be able to register the same resource type with multiple handlers. When retrieving data from a well normalised relational database you are bound to get the same type response from multiple requests. This happens when creating multiple queries (in Linq) to retrieve data from either side of the one-to-many relation, which of course is important to the whole structure of the database.
Taking advice from Seb, and hoping I've implemented his suggestion correctly, I have taken the database model class, and built a derived class from it in a resources namespace for each instance of when a duplicating resource type might have been introduced.
ResourceSpace.Has.ResourcesOfType<IList<Client>>()
.AtUri("/clients").And
.AtUri("/client/{clientid}").HandledBy<ClientsHandler>().AsJsonDataContract();
ResourceSpace.Has.ResourcesOfType<IList<AgencyClient>>()
.AtUri("/agencyclients").And
.AtUri("/agencyclients/{agencyid}").HandledBy<AgencyClientsHandler>().AsJsonDataContract();
Client is my Model class which I have then derived AgencyClient from.
namespace ProductName.Resources
{
public class AgencyClient: Client { }
}
You don't even need to cast the base class received from your Linq-SQL data access layer into your derived class. The Linq cast method isn't intended for that kind of thing anyway, and although this code will compile it is WRONG and you will receive a runtime exception 'LINQ to Entities only supports casting Entity Data Model primitive types.'
Context.Set<Client>().Cast<AgencyClient>().ToList(); //will receive a runtime error
More conventional casts like (AgencyClient) won't work as conversion to a SubClass isn't easily possible in C#. Convert base class to derived class
Using the AS operator will again compile and will even run, but will give a null value in the returned lists and therefore won't retrieve the data intended.
Context.Set<Client>().ToList() as IEnumerable<AgencyClient>; //will compile and run but will return null
I still don't understand how OpenRasta handles the differing return class from the handler to the ResourceType but it does, so let's take advantage of it. Perhaps Seb might be able to elaborate?
OpenRasta therefore treats these classes separately and the right handler methods are executed for the URIs.
I patched OpenRasta to make it work. These are the files I touched:
OpenRasta/Configuration/MetaModel/Handlers/HandlerMetaModelHandler.cs
OpenRasta/Handlers/HandlerRepository.cs
OpenRasta/Handlers/IHandlerRepository.cs
OpenRasta/Pipeline/Contributors/HandlerResolverContributor.cs
The main change is that now the handler repository gets the registered URIs in the initializing call to AddResourceHandler, so when GetHandlerTypesFor is called later on during handler selection, it can also check the URI. Interface-wise, I changed this:
public interface IHandlerRepository
{
void AddResourceHandler(object resourceKey, IType handlerType);
IEnumerable<IType> GetHandlerTypesFor(object resourceKey);
to that:
public interface IHandlerRepository
{
void AddResourceHandler(object resourceKey, IList<UriModel> resourceUris, IType handlerType);
IEnumerable<IType> GetHandlerTypesFor(object resourceKey, UriRegistration selectedResource);
I'll omit the implementation for brevity.
This change also means that OpenRasta won't waste time on further checking of handlers (their method signatures etc.) that are not relevant to the request at hand.
I'd still like to get other opinions on this issue, if possible. Maybe I just missed something.
I've created a new custom JSON codec for OpenRasta which works fine.
I need to pass arguments to the codec's write method when the handler is executed but cannot find any documentation on how to do it.
I notice in the implemented WriteTo method, there is a string[] codecParameters parameter, however no idea how to pass them in.
Anyone come accross this problem before? Thanks
the codec parameters are per-request. They're intended to be used together with (for example) the PathSegmentAsParameterUriDecorator.
For example, if you enable that decorator, the path /resource;segment will be treated as /resource by openrasta, and a parameter will be created with the "segment" value, and passed to the codec.
If you wish to pass information to the codec from the handler, there's nothing there, as architecturally it goes against the design of OpenRasta, which specifically prevents handlers and codecs from talking to each others.
If you wish to pass configuration data to your codec, you use the Configuration property from the ICodec interface, which will be filled with whatever object you have provided at configuration time.
You provide the configuration object either through the paramter in the .TranscodedBy(object configuration) method, or if you do custom registration using the configuration metamodel, bu adding the configuration to your Configuration property on CodecModel (which incidently is used in the ResourceModel object created by the fluent API).
Do you have a specific scenario I can help with?
As I understand IoC-container is helpful in creation of application-level objects like services and factories. But domain-level objects should be created manually.
Spring's manual tells us: "Typically one does not configure fine-grained domain objects in the container, because it is usually the responsibility of DAOs and business logic to create/load domain objects."
Well. But what if my domain "fine-grained" object depends on some application-level object.
For example I have an UserViewer(User user, UserConstants constants) class.
There user is domain object which cannot be injected, but UserViewer also needs UserConstants which is high-level object injected by IoC-container.
I want to inject UserConstants from the IoC-container, but I also need a transient runtime parameter User here.
What is wrong with the design?
Thanks in advance!
UPDATE
It seems I was not precise enough with my question. What I really need is an example how to do this:
create instance of class UserViewer(User user, UserService service), where user is passed as the parameter and service is injected from IoC.
If I inject UserViewer viewer then how do I pass user to it?
If I create UserViewer viewer manually then how do I pass service to it?
there's nothing wrong with this design. you use Factories for that, which have one leg in the domain, one leg in infrastructure.
You can either write them manually, or have the container do that for you, by things like TypedFactoryFacility in Windsor.
Also when your domain objects come from persistence layer you can plug your container there to inject the services they require (NHibernate can do that).
But what if my domain "fine-grained" object depends on some application-level object?
It is precisely this that is considered bad-practice. I would say the problems could be:
There are tons of these objects, so there can be performance and memory issues.
The POJO style is that they can be used in all environments (persisted in the database, processed in business algorithms and rules, read and set in view technologies, serialized and send over the network). Injecting application-level objects in them could cause the following problems:
In your architecture, you probably have the rule that some (most) application-level objects are usable in some layers, not in others. Because all layers have access to the pojos, the rule would be violated transitively.
When serialized and rebuild in another JVM, what would be the meaning of your application-level objects. They are useless, they must be changed for the local equivalents...
Typically, the pojos that constitute your domain are self-contained. They can have access to other pojos (and many enums), that's all.
In addition to the data, they have methods that implement the details of the business rules or algorithms (remember the OO idea of grouping data and code that work on it ;-) ):
This is especially good when they have inheritance, as this allow to customize a business rule for some pojo by providing a different implementation (differing case without if or switch: remember OO? ;-) ).
Any code that requires access to application-level objects (like accessing the database) is taken out, for example to a Service or Manager. But that code stays high level, thus readable and simple, because the pojos themselves take care of the low level details (and the special cases).
After the fact, you often find out that the pojo methods get reused a lot, and composed in different ways by the Services or Managers. That's a big win on reducing duplication, the methods names provide much needed "meaning", and provide an easier access to developers that are new to a module.
For your update:
create instance of class UserViewer(User user, UserService service), where user is passed as the parameter and service is injected from IoC.
If I inject UserViewer viewer then how do I pass user to it?
If I create UserViewer viewer manually then how do I pass service to it?
In that case, you need a factory method (possibly on a Factory or Locator of yours). It could look at follow, separating the two parts:
public UserViewer createUserViewer(User user) {
UserViewer viewer = instantiateBean(UserViewer.class);
viewer.setUser(user);
return viewer;
}
private <E> E instantiateBean(Class<E> clazz) {
// call the IoC container to create and inject a bean
}