I'm trying to do some attribute-based interception using structuremap but I'm struggling to tie up the last loose ends.
I have a custom Registry that scans my assemblies and in this Registry I have defined the following ITypeInterceptor whose purpose it is to match types decorated with the given attribute and then apply the interceptor if matched. The class is defined as such:
public class AttributeMatchTypeInterceptor<TAttribute, TInterceptor>
: TypeInterceptor
where TAttribute : Attribute
where TInterceptor : IInterceptor
{
private readonly ProxyGenerator m_proxyGeneration = new ProxyGenerator();
public object Process(object target, IContext context)
{
return m_proxyGeneration.CreateInterfaceProxyWithTarget(target, ObjectFactory.GetInstance<TInterceptor>());
}
public bool MatchesType(Type type)
{
return type.GetCustomAttributes(typeof (TAttribute), true).Length > 0;
}
}
//Usage
[Transactional]
public class OrderProcessor : IOrderProcessor{
}
...
public class MyRegistry : Registry{
public MyRegistry()
{
RegisterInterceptor(
new AttributeMatchTypeInterceptor<TransactionalAttribute, TransactionInterceptor>());
...
}
}
I'm using DynamicProxy from the Castle.Core to create the interceptors, but my problem is that the object returned from the CreateInterfaceProxyWithTarget(...) call does not implement the interface that triggered the creation of the target instance in structuremap (i.e IOrderProcessor in example above). I was hoping that the IContext parameter would reveal this interface, but I can only seem to get a hold of the concrete type (i.e. OrderProcessor in example above).
I'm looking for guidance on how to have this scenario work, either by calling the ProxyGenerator to return an instance that implements all interfaces as the target instance, by obtaining the requested interface from structuremap or through some other mechanism.
I actually got something working with a slight caveat so I'll just post this as the answer. The trick was to obtain the interface and pass that into the CreateInterfaceProxyWithTarget. My only problem was that I could not find a way to query the IContext about which interface it was currently resolving so I ended up just looking up the first interface on the target which worked for me. See code below
public class AttributeMatchTypeInterceptor<TAttribute, TInterceptor> :
TypeInterceptor
where TAttribute : Attribute
where TInterceptor : IInterceptor
{
private readonly ProxyGenerator m_proxyGeneration = new ProxyGenerator();
public object Process(object target, IContext context)
{
//NOTE: can't query IContext for actual interface
Type interfaceType = target.GetType().GetInterfaces().First();
return m_proxyGeneration.CreateInterfaceProxyWithTarget(
interfaceType,
target,
ObjectFactory.GetInstance<TInterceptor>());
}
public bool MatchesType(Type type)
{
return type.GetCustomAttributes(typeof (TAttribute), true).Length > 0;
}
}
Hope this helps someone
Related
I have a class (OmeletteMaker) that contains an injected field (Vegetable). I would like to write a producer that instantiates an injected object of this class. If I use 'new', the result will not use injection. If I try to use a WeldContainer, I get an exception, since OmeletteMaker is #Alternative. Is there a third way to achieve this?
Here is my code:
#Alternative
public class OmeletteMaker implements EggMaker {
#Inject
Vegetable vegetable;
#Override
public String toString() {
return "Omelette: " + vegetable;
}
}
a vegetable for injection:
public class Tomato implements Vegetable {
#Override
public String toString() {
return "Tomato";
}
}
main file
public class CafeteriaMainApp {
public static WeldContainer container = new Weld().initialize();
public static void main(String[] args) {
Restaurant restaurant = (Restaurant) container.instance().select(Restaurant.class).get();
System.out.println(restaurant);
}
#Produces
public EggMaker eggMakerGenerator() {
return new OmeletteMaker();
}
}
The result I get is "Restaurant: Omelette: null", While I'd like to get "Restaurant: Omelette: Tomato"
If you provide OmeletteMaker yourself, its fields will not be injected by the CDI container. To use #Alternative, don't forget specifying it in the beans.xml and let the container instantiate the EggMaker instance:
<alternatives>
<class>your.package.path.OmeletteMaker</class>
</alternatives>
If you only want to implement this with Producer method then my answer may be inappropriate. I don't think it is possible (with standard CDI). The docs says: Producer methods provide a way to inject objects that are not beans, objects whose values may vary at runtime, and objects that require custom initialization.
Thanks Kukeltje for pointing to the other CDI question in comment:
With CDI extensions like Deltaspike, it is possible to inject the fields into an object created with new, simply with BeanProvider#injectFileds. I tested this myself:
#Produces
public EggMaker eggMakerProducer() {
EggMaker eggMaker = new OmeletteMaker();
BeanProvider.injectFields(eggMaker);
return eggMaker;
}
Need some help trying to solve a problem resolving an implementation of a service at runtime based on a parameter. In other words use a factory pattern with DI.
We have Autofac wired in to our MVC application. I am trying to figure out how we can use a user session variable (Call it Ordering Type) to be used for the Dependency Resolver to resolve the correct implementation of a service.
An example of what we are trying to do.
The application has two "types" of ordering - real eCommerce type of ordering (add stuff to a shopping cart, checkout etc).
The other is called Forecast ordering. Users create orders - but they do not get fulfilled right away. They go through an approval process and then fulfilled.
The bottom line is the data schema and back end systems the application talks to changes based on the order type.
What I want to do is:
I have IOrderManagerService
public interface IOrderManagerService
{
Order GetOrder(int orderNumber);
int CreateOrder(Order order);
}
Because we have two ordering "types" - I have two implementations of the the IOrderManagerService:
public class ShelfOrderManager : IOrderManagerService
{
public Order GetOrder(int orderMumber)
{
...code
}
public int CreateOrder(Order order)
{
...code
}
}
and
public class ForecastOrderManager: IOrderManagerService
{
public Order GetOrder(int orderMumber)
{
...code
}
public int CreateOrder(Order order)
{
...code
}
}
My First question is - in my MVC application - do I register these implementations as?
builder.RegisterType<ShelfOrderManager>().As<IOrderManagerService>();
builder.RegisterType<ForecastOrderManager>().As<IOrderManagerService>();
What we are planning on doing is sticking the user selected ordering type in a users session. When a user wants to view order status - depending on their selected ordering "type" - I need the resolver to give the controller the correct implementation.
public class OrderStatusController : Controller
{
private readonly IOrderManagerService _orderManagerService;
public OrderStatusController(IOrderManagerService orderManagerService)
{
//This needs to be the correct implementation based on the users "type".
_orderManagerService = orderManagerService;
}
public ActionResult GetOrder(int orderNumber)
{
var model = _orderManagerService.GetOrder(orderNumber);
return View(model);
}
}
I've ready about the the delegate factory and this answer explains the concept well.
The problem is the runtime parameters are being used to construct the service and resolve at runtime. i.e.
var service = resolvedServiceClass.Factory("runtime parameter")
All this would do is give me "service" that used the "runtime parameter" in the constructor.
I've looked at Keyed or Named resolution too.
At first I thought I could combine these two techniques - but the controller has the dependency on the interface - not the concrete implementation. (as it should)
Any ideas on how to get around this would be MUCH appreciated.
As it would turn out we were close. #Andrei is on target with what we did. I'll explain the answer below for the next person that comes across this issue.
To recap the problem - I needed to resolve a specific concrete implementation of an interface using Autofac at run time. This is commonly solved by the Factory Pattern - but we already had DI implemented.
The solution was using both. Using the delegate factory Autofac supports, I created a simple factory class.
I elected to resolve the component context privately
DependencyResolver.Current.GetService<IComponentContext>();
versus having Autofac resolve it predominately so I did not have to include IComponentContext in all of my constructors that that will be using the factory.
The factory will be used to resolve the services that are dependent on run time parameters - which means wherever a
ISomeServiceThatHasMultipleImplementations
is used in a constructor - I am going to replace it with ServiceFactory.Factory factory. I did not want to ALSO include IComponentContext wherever I needed the factory.
enum OrderType
{
Shelf,
Forecast
}
public class ServiceFactory : IServiceFactory
{
private readonly IComponentContext _componentContext;
private readonly OrderType _orderType;
public ServiceFactory(OrderType orderingType)
{
_componentContext = DependencyResolver.Current.GetService<IComponentContext>();
_orderType = orderingType;
}
public delegate ServiceFactory Factory(OrderType orderingType);
public T Resolve<T>()
{
if(!_componentContext.IsRegistered<T>())
return _componentContext.ResolveNamed<T>(_orderType.ToString());
return _componentContext.Resolve<T>();
}
}
With the factory written, we also used the Keyed services.
Using my order context -
public interface IOrderManagerService
{
Order GetOrder(int orderNumber);
int CreateOrder(Order order);
}
public class ShelfOrderManager : IOrderManagerService
{
public Order GetOrder(int orderNumber)
{
...
}
public int CreateOrder(Order order)
{
...
}
}
public class ForecastOrderManager : IOrderManagerService
{
public Order GetOrder(int orderNumber)
{
...
}
public int CreateOrder(Order order)
{
...
}
}
The registration of Keyed services:
//register the shelf implementation
builder.RegisterType<ShelfOrderManager>()
.Keyed(OrderType.Shelf)
.As<IOrderManager>();
//register the forecast implementation
builder.RegisterType<ForecastOrderManager>()
.Keyed(OrderType.Shelf)
.As<IOrderManager>();
Register the factory:
builder.RegisterType<IMS.POS.Services.Factory.ServiceFactory>()
.AsSelf()
.SingleInstance();
Finally using it in the controllers (or any other class for that matter):
public class HomeController : BaseController
{
private readonly IContentManagerService _contentManagerService;
private readonly IViewModelService _viewModelService;
private readonly IApplicationSettingService _applicationSettingService;
private readonly IOrderManagerService _orderManagerService;
private readonly IServiceFactory _factory;
public HomeController(ServiceFactory.Factory factory,
IViewModelService viewModelService,
IContentManagerService contentManagerService,
IApplicationSettingService applicationSettingService)
{
//first assign the factory
//We keep the users Ordering Type in session - if the value is not set - default to Shelf ordering
_factory = factory(UIUserSession?.OrderingMode ?? OrderType.Shelf);
//now that I have a factory to get the implementation I need
_orderManagerService = _factory.Resolve<IOrderManagerService>();
//The rest of these are resolved by Autofac
_contentManagerService = contentManagerService;
_viewModelService = viewModelService;
_applicationSettingService = applicationSettingService;
}
}
I want to work out a bit more handling of the Resolve method - but for the first pass this works. A little bit Factory Pattern (where we need it) but still using Autofac to do most of the work.
I would not rely on Autofac for this. IOC is used to resolve a dependency and provide an implementation for it, what you need is to call a different implementation of the same interface based on a decision flag.
I would use a simple factory basically, like a class with 2 static methods and call whichever implementation you need need to when you know what the decision is. This gives you the run-time resolver you are after. Keep it simple I'd say.
This being said it seems there is another option. Have a look at the "select by context" option, maybe you can redesign your classes to take advantage of this: http://docs.autofac.org/en/latest/faq/select-by-context.html
Preliminaries
I'm using Ninject.MVC3 2.2.2.0 Nuget Package for injecting into my controller an implementation of a IDomain Interface that separates my Business Logic (BL) using an Factory approach.
I'm registering my Ninject Modules in the preconfigured NinjectMVC3.cs using:
private static void RegisterServices(IKernel kernel)
{
var modules = new INinjectModule[]
{
new DomainBLModule(),
new ADOModule()
};
kernel.Load(modules);
}
I'm trying to avoid the fatal curse of the diabolic Service Locator anti-pattern.
The Domain Class uses a DBContext that i'm trying to inject an interface implementation too, via an IDBContext, with the following scenario:
IDomainBLFactory:
public interface IDomainBLFactory
{
DomainBL CreateNew();
}
DomainBLFactory:
public class DomainBLFactory : IDomainBLFactory
{
public DomainBL CreateNew()
{
return new DomainBL();
}
}
In the controller's namespace:
public class DomainBLModule : NinjectModule
{
public override void Load()
{
Bind<IDomainBLFactory>().To<DomainBLFactory>().InRequestScope();
}
}
At this point i can inject the IDomainBLFactory implementation into my controller using Ninject Constructor Injection without any problem:
public class MyController : Controller
{
private readonly IDomainBLFactory DomainBLFactory;
// Default Injected Constructor
public MyController(IDomainBLFactory DomainBLFactory)
{
this.DomainBLFactory = DomainBLFactory;
}
... (use the Domain for performing tasks/commands with the Database Context)
}
Now my central problem.
In the DomainBL implementation, i will inject the dependency to a particular DBContext, in this case ADO DBContext from Entity Framework, again, using a IDBContextFactory:
IDbDataContextFactory
public interface IDbDataContextFactory
{
myADOEntities CreateNew();
}
DbDataContextFactory
public class DbDataContextFactory : IDbDataContextFactory
{
public myADOEntities CreateNew()
{
return new myADOEntities ();
}
}
ADOModule
public class ADOModule : NinjectModule
{
public override void Load()
{
Bind<IDbDataContextFactory>().To<DbDataContextFactory>().InRequestScope();
}
}
Now in the DomainBL implementation I faced the problem of injecting the necessary interface for the DBContext Object Factory:
public class DomainBL
{
private readonly IDbDataContextFactory contextFactory;
**** OPS, i tried to understand about 10+ Stackoverflow articles ***
...
}
What have I tried?
To Use the constructor Injection. But I don't know what to inject in the call for the Factory CreateNew() in the IDBContextFactory. For clear:
public class DomainBLFactory: IDomainBLFactory
{
// Here the constructor requires one argument for passing the factory impl.
public DomainBL CreateNew()
{
return new DomainBL(?????) // I need a IDBContextFactory impl to resolve.
//It's not like in the MVC Controller where injection takes place internally
//for the controller constructor. I'm outside a controller
}
}
In this Useful Post, our unique true friend Remo Gloor describes in a comment a possible solution for me, citing: "Create an interface that has a CreateSomething method that takes everything you need to create the instance and have it return the instance. Then in your configuration you implement this interface and add an IResolutionRoot to its constructor and use this instace to Get the required object."
Questions: How do I implement this in a proper way using Ninject.MVC3 and my modest Domain Class approach? How do I Resolve the IResolutionRoot without be punished for relaying in the Service Locator anti-pattern?
To Use the property injection for an IDBContexFactory. In the course of learning and reading all the contradictory points of view plus the theoretical explanations about it, I can deduce it's not a proper way of doing the injection for my DBContexFactory class code. Nevermind. It doesn't work anyway.
public class DomainBL
{
[Inject]
public IDbDataContextFactory contextFactory
{
get;
set;
}
//Doesn't works, contextFactory is null with or without parameterless constructor
.... (methods that uses contextFactory.CreateNew()....
}
Question: What am I missing? Even if this approach is wrong the property is not injecting.
Be cursed. Use a DependencyResolver and live with the stigmata. This works and I will remain in this approach until a proper solution appears for me. And this is really frustrating because the lack of knowledge in my last 10 days effort trying to understand and do things right.
public class DomainBL
{
private readonly IDbDataContextFactory contextFactory;
this.contextFactory = DependencyResolver.Current.GetService<IDbDataContextFactory>();
//So sweet, it works.. but i'm a sinner.
}
Question: Is there a big mistake in my understanding of the Factory Approach for the injection of interfaced implementations and using a Domain Driven Approach for taking apart the Business Logic? In the case I'm wrong, what stack of patterns should I implement with confidence?
I saw before a really big quantity of articles and blogs that does not ask this important question in a open a clear way.
Remo Gloor introduces the Ninject.Extensions.Factory for the Ninject 3.0.0 RC in www.planetgeek.ch/2011/12/31/ninject-extensions-factory-introduction.
Question: Will this extension work coupled with Ninject.MVC3 for general porpouse?. In such case it should be my hope for the near future.
Thank you all in advance for your guidance and remember we appreciate your kind help. I think a lot of people will find this scenario useful too.
I don't really get the purpose of your factories. Normally, you have exactly one ObjectContext instance for one request. This means you don't need the factory and can simply bind myADOEntities in Request scope and inject it into your DomainBL without adding the factories:
Bind<myADOEntities>().ToSelf().InRequestScope();
Bind<DomainBL>().ToSelf().InRequestScope();
And Yes the factory and mvc extrensions work together.
Here's an implementation of a generic IFactory to solve the problem without resorting to the ServiceLocator anti-pattern.
First you define a nice generic factory interface
public interface IFactory<T>
{
T CreateNew();
}
And define the implementation which uses ninject kernel to create the objects requested
class NinjectFactory<T> : IFactory<T>
{
private IKernel Kernel;
public NinjectFactory( IKernel Kernel )
{
this.Kernel = Kernel;
}
public T CreateNew()
{
return Kernel.Get<T>();
}
}
Binding to your factory using the following
private static void RegisterServices(IKernel kernel)
{
kernel.Bind<myADOEntities>().ToSelf();
kernel.Bind<DomainBL>().ToSelf();
kernel.Bind(typeof(IFactory<>)).To(typeof(NinjectFactory<>));
}
You can now do the following in your controller.
public class MyController : Controller
{
private readonly IFactory<DomainBL> DomainBLFactory;
public MyController( IFactory<DomainBL> DomainBLFactory )
{
this.DomainBLFactory = DomainBLFactory;
}
// ... (use the Domain for performing tasks/commands with the Database Context)
}
And in your DomainBL
public class DomainBL
{
IFactory<myADOEntities> EntitiesFactory;
public DomainBL( IFactory<myADOEntities> EntitiesFactory )
{
this.EntitiesFactory = EntitiesFactory;
}
// ... (use the Entities factory whenever you need to create a Domain Context)
}
I have a command class that needs to have 2 constructors. However,
using structuremap it seems that I can only specify one constructor to
be used. I have solved the problem for now by subtyping the specific
command class, which each implementation implementing it's own
interface and constructor. Like the code below shows. The
ISelectCommand implements two separate interfaces for the
string constructor and the int constructor, just for the sake of
registering the two subtypes using structuremap.
However, I consider this a hack and I just wonder why is it not
possible for structuremap to resolve the constructor signature by the
type passed in as parameter for the constructor? Then I could register
the SelectProductCommand as an ISelectCommand and
instantiate it like:
ObjectFactury.With(10).Use>();
orObjectFactury.With("testproduct").Use>();
public class SelectProductCommand : ISelectCommand<IProduct>,
ICommand, IExecutable
{
private readonly Func<Product, Boolean> _selector;
private IEnumerable<IProduct> _resultList;
public SelectProductCommand(Func<Product, Boolean> selector)
{
_selector = selector;
}
public IEnumerable<IProduct> Result
{
get { return _resultList; }
}
public void Execute(GenFormDataContext context)
{
_resultList = GetProductRepository().Fetch(context,
_selector);
}
private Repository<IProduct, Product> GetProductRepository()
{
return ObjectFactory.GetInstance<Repository<IProduct,
Product>>();
}
}
public class SelectProductIntCommand: SelectProductCommand
{
public SelectProductIntCommand(Int32 id): base(x =>
x.ProductId == id) {}
}
public class SelectProductStringCommand: SelectProductCommand
{
public SelectProductStringCommand(String name): base(x =>
x.ProductName.Contains(name)) {}
}
P.s. I know how to tell structuremap what constructor map to use, but my again my question is if there is a way to have structuremap select the right constructor based on the parameter passed to the constructor (i.e. using regular method overloading).
The short answer is this post by the creator of Structuremap.
The long answer is regarding the structure you have in that piece of code. In my view, a command is by definition a "class" that does something to an "entity", i.e it modifies the class somehow. Think CreateNewProductCommand.
Here you are using commands for querying, if I'm not mistaken. You also have a bit of a separation of concern issue floating around here. The command posted defines what to do and how to do it, which is to much and you get that kind of Service location you're using in
private Repository<IProduct, Product> GetProductRepository()
{
return ObjectFactory.GetInstance<Repository<IProduct, Product>>();
}
The way I'd structure commands is to use CreateProductCommand as a data contract, i.e it only contains data such as product information.
Then you have a CreateProductCommandHandler which implements IHandles<CreateProductCommand> with a single method Handle or Execute. That way you get better separation of concern and testability.
As for the querying part, just use your repositores directly in your controller/presenter, alternatively use the Query Object pattern
I think I solved the problem using a small utility class. This class gets the concrete type from ObjectFactory and uses this type to construct the instance according to the parameters past into the factory method. Now on the 'client' side I use ObjectFactory to create an instance of CommandFactory. The implementation of CommandFactory is in another solution and thus the 'client solution' remains independent of the 'server' solution.
public class CommandFactory
{
public ICommand Create<T>()
{
return Create<T>(new object[] {});
}
public ICommand Create<T>(object arg1)
{
return Create<T>(new[] {arg1});
}
public ICommand Create<T>(object arg1, object arg2)
{
return Create<T>(new[] {arg1, arg2});
}
public ICommand Create<T>(object arg1, object arg2, object arg3)
{
return Create<T>(new[] {arg1, arg2, arg3});
}
public ICommand Create<T>(object[] arguments)
{
return (ICommand)Activator.CreateInstance(GetRegisteredType<T>(), arguments);
}
public static Type GetRegisteredType<T>()
{
return ObjectFactory.Model.DefaultTypeFor(typeof (T));
}
}
Following on from this question I would like autofac to inject the type of the declaring object into the constructor of my NLog service, so that it can correctly log which type is logging entries.
My NLogService class looks like this...
public class NLogService : ILogService
{
private readonly Logger _logger;
public NLogService(Type t)
{
var consumerType = t.DeclaringType.FullName;
_logger = LogManager.GetLogger(consumerType);
}
However it fails on app startup because it obviously cannot work out what to inject into the constructor of the NLogService with the following error...
None of the constructors found with
'Public binding flags' on type
'MyProduct.Domain.Services.Logging.NLogService'
can be invoked with the available
services and parameters: Cannot
resolve parameter 'System.Type t' of
constructor 'Void .ctor(System.Type)'.
So, my question is - how do i instruct autofac to inject the type of the calling class?
I tried this...
public NLogService(Type t)
{
var method = MethodBase.GetCurrentMethod();
Type consumingType = method.DeclaringType;
var consumerType = consumingType.FullName;
var consumerType = t.DeclaringType.FullName;
_logger = LogManager.GetLogger(consumerType);
}
But i just end up with MyProduct.Domain.Services.Logging.NLogService
What i want is the type of the class that is doing the actual logging.
i have already tried this suggestion and it didnt work for me either.
Could make your NLogService generic, i.e. NLogService<T> and use Autofac's open generics support?
Then you could do this:
public class NLogService<T> : ILogger<T>
{
private readonly Logger _logger;
public NLogService()
{
_logger = LogManager.GetLogger(typeof(T).FullName);
}
}
There is no real good way to do this with Autofac, because does not have support for 'context based injection' (which is what you are trying to do). There is a workaround, but it aint pretty...
What you can do is revert to property injection and define a base class or interface for that ILogService property. For instance, you can define the following interface:
public interface ILoggerContainer
{
public ILogService Logger { get; set; }
}
Now you can implement this interface on all types that need a logger:
public class Consumer : IConsumer, ILoggerContainer
{
public ILogService Logger { get; set; }
}
With this in place you can configure Autofac as follows:
builder.RegisterType<ILoggerContainer>()
.OnActivating(e =>
{
var type = typeof(LogService<>)
.MakeGenericType(e.Instance.GetType());
e.Instance.Logger = e.Context.Resolve(type);
});
Another workaround, that you may find cleaner is to inject an ILogger<T> with the same type as the type of the parent type:
public class Consumer : IConsumer
{
public Consumer(ILogger<Consumer> logger) { }
}
This makes the configuration much easier and prevents you from having to have a base class. Which one is most appropriate is up to you.
As I said, these are workarounds, but to be honest, you might need to reconsider your logging strategy in your application. Perhaps you are logging at too many places. In the applications I write there is hardly ever a need to log, and when I do, I write an logging message that is expressive enough so that there is no need to communicate the type that triggered the event. And when you log exception, you will always have a complete stack trace (and exception logging should almost only happen in the outer layer of your application and not within services anyway).
The following technique works well in our experience:
Create an attribute like below, which can be applied at class level or at the injection site:
[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Parameter | AttributeTargets.Class)]
public class LoggerAttribute : Attribute
{
public readonly string Name;
public LoggerAttribute(string name)
{
Name = name;
}
}
Create an Autofac module that you register with the ContainerBuilder:
public class LogInjectionModule : Module
{
protected override void AttachToComponentRegistration(IComponentRegistry registry, IComponentRegistration registration)
{
registration.Preparing += OnComponentPreparing;
}
static void OnComponentPreparing(object sender, PreparingEventArgs e)
{
var typePreparing = e.Component.Activator.LimitType;
// By default, the name supplied to the logging instance is the name of the type in which it is being injected into.
string loggerName = typePreparing.FullName;
//If there is a class-level logger attribute, then promote its supplied name value instead as the logger name to use.
var loggerAttribute = (LoggerAttribute)typePreparing.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(LoggerAttribute), true).FirstOrDefault();
if (loggerAttribute != null)
{
loggerName = loggerAttribute.Name;
}
e.Parameters = e.Parameters.Union(new Parameter[]
{
new ResolvedParameter(
(p, i) => p.ParameterType == typeof (Logger),
(p, i) =>
{
// If the parameter being injected has its own logger attribute, then promote its name value instead as the logger name to use.
loggerAttribute = (LoggerAttribute)
p.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(LoggerAttribute),true).FirstOrDefault();
if (loggerAttribute != null)
{
loggerName = loggerAttribute.Name;
}
// Return a new Logger instance for injection, parameterised with the most appropriate name which we have determined above.
return LogManager.GetLogger(loggerName);
}),
// Always make an unamed instance of Logger available for use in delegate-based registration e.g.: Register((c,p) => new Foo(p.TypedAs<Logger>())
new TypedParameter(typeof(Logger), LogManager.GetLogger(loggerName))
});
}
}
You can now inject a named Logger in any one of these ways depending on individual scenarios:
By default, the injected logger name will be given the full type name of the class it is injected into:
public class Foo
{
public Foo(Logger logger)
{
}
}
Use a constructor parameter [Logger] attribute to override the logger name:
public class Foo
{
public Foo([Logger("Meaningful Name")]Logger logger)
{
}
}
Use a class-level [Logger] attribute to set the same logger name override for all constructor overloads:
[Logger("Meaningful Name")]
public class Foo
{
public Foo(Logger logger, int something)
{
}
public Foo(Logger logger, int something, DateTime somethingElse)
{
}
}
Use constructor parameter [Logger] attributes on each constructor overload to set different logger names depending on the context of how you were constructed:
public class Foo
{
public Foo(Logger("Meaningful Name")]Logger logger, int something)
{
}
public Foo(Logger("Different Name")]Logger logger, int something, DateTime somethingElse)
{
}
}
IMPORTANT NOTE: If you register types to be resolved with logger constructor injection using Autofac's delegate registration, you MUST use the two parameter overload like so: Register((c,p) => new Foo(p.TypedAs<Logger>()).
Hope this helps!
It is possible to do this without generics.
However, please note that in Autofac 6.x, the resolution process has changed to use a resolve pipeline. This doesn't matter for most scenarios, but it does when you want to use the lifetime events like OnPreparing, etc. Most of the answers here on SO around overriding the Preparing event are very old and are now outdated. You can't override Preparing directly anymore.
There is an example on the Autofac documentation site doing this for log4net, and it works with NLog with only minor changes. Here is the basic idea:
public class Log4NetMiddleware : IResolveMiddleware
{
public PipelinePhase Phase => PipelinePhase.ParameterSelection;
public void Execute(ResolveRequestContext context, Action<ResolveRequestContext> next)
{
// Add our parameters.
context.ChangeParameters(context.Parameters.Union(
new[]
{
new ResolvedParameter(
(p, i) => p.ParameterType == typeof(ILog),
(p, i) => LogManager.GetLogger(p.Member.DeclaringType)
),
}));
// Continue the resolve.
next(context);
// Has an instance been activated?
if (context.NewInstanceActivated)
{
var instanceType = context.Instance.GetType();
// Get all the injectable properties to set.
// If you wanted to ensure the properties were only UNSET properties,
// here's where you'd do it.
var properties = instanceType
.GetProperties(BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance)
.Where(p => p.PropertyType == typeof(ILog) && p.CanWrite && p.GetIndexParameters().Length == 0);
// Set the properties located.
foreach (var propToSet in properties)
{
propToSet.SetValue(context.Instance, LogManager.GetLogger(instanceType), null);
}
}
}
}
Please also note that you have to understand how middleware works in Autofac. The documentation is a good place to start.