I am new to the Laravel framework, and hopefully, someone can save my life!
So I am making a WEB application demo by using Laravel, and I use Vus as the front-end. I send the request from Vue to Laravel's controller, but I am wondering if I can maintain the object inside the controller when I finish one HTTP request, then I can still use the object's property data in another request (the request could be in the same controller or another controller)?
Especially the object I want to maintain has some properties like token and expired time, and a function inside to check if the token is expired or not. So I would like to keep these properties inside the object and just store them in the memory.
class OneController extends Controller
{
private object $object;
public function __consturct()
{
// Do something to $this->object
}
}
class AnotherController extends Controller
{
private object $object;
public function __consturct()
{
// Do something to $this->object
}
}
I don't know if I describe my problem clearly, so don't hesitate to tell me if you want more context!
Thank you, World!
Related
Is there a way to access the container and thus the $app array of settings from a Slim Model file? It appears that this is ok for controllers but when I try to access $this->container always comes back null.
You can't. All that is not instantiated by the app itself won't be injected with dependencies/have access to the container.
However, there are ways to solve the problem you are facing.
Using a parameter in the model constructor
You could simply add a parameter in your constructor that takes the settings array:
function __construct(array $settings){...}
and then pass it when instantiating from a controller.
Pay attention to the fact that a container is not a service locator (see part 1.3 of the PSR), so you should not pass the container directly.
Using a factory that contains the array of settings
You could create a Factory that takes the array of settings as constructor, then store an instance in your container and add it as property of your class, this is an extension to the first answer that will save you time by not having to pass the settings as argument ever time.
// The factory
class MyModelFactory{
private array $settings;
function __construct(array $settings){
$this->settings = $settings;
}
public function makeInstance(): MyModel
{
return new MyModel($this->settings);
}
}
// In the controller
class Controller{
private MyModelFactory $myModelFactory;
...
// In your route method
$myModelInstance = $this->myModelFactory->makeInstance();
...
}
I have not included how to put the Factory inside the container and how to populate the controller class with it since this depends on the way you setup your application, but it's the easy part of the whole process :)
I'am a Brazilian developer, so... sorry for my limited English right away.
Well, in fact my problem is more a convention problem because until now I hadn't use services with Laravel (my apps were that simple so far).
I read about it before ask this question, but nothing helped with this specific situation. I'll try to describe in a objective way.
before that, just a comment: I know about the mistake using just controllers in these example. The ask is really about that mistake.
Well, the actual structure is:
abstract class CRUDController extends Controller {
protected function __construct($data, $validatorData) {
// store the data in a attribute
// create with Validator facade the validation and store too
}
abstract protected function createRecord();
protected function create() {
try {
// do the validation and return an Response instance with error messages
// if the data is ok, store in the database with models
// (here's where the magic takes place) in that store!
// to do that, calls the method createRecord (which is abstract)
$this->createRecord();
// return a success message in an Response instance
}
catch(\Exception $e) {
// return an Response instance with error messages
}
}
}
class UserController extends CRUDController {
public function __construct($data) {
parent::__construct($data, [
'rules' => [
// specific user code here
],
'messages' => [
// specific user code here
],
'customAttributes' => [
// specific user code here
]
]);
}
protected function createRecord() {
$user = new UserModel();
// store values here...
$user->save();
return $user;
}
}
// here's the route to consider in that example
Route::post('/user', 'WebsiteController#register');
class WebsiteController extends Controller {
private $request;
public function __construct(Request $request) {
$this->request = $request;
}
public function register() {
$user = new UserController();
$user->create($this->request);
// here's the problem: controller working with another controller
}
}
class UserAPIController extends Controller {
// use here the UserController too
}
and many other classes that extends CRUDController in the same way...
What I want
I want to create a controller (called here as CRUDController) to reuse methods like the pattern says (create, read, update and delete).
To be really objective here I'll use the create method as an example.
With the code above it seems clear the purpose? I think so... all my controllers have that code of validation equal and reusable. That's the thing.
Besides that, I want to my route of website call another controller (UserController) to store new users... but in the same way, I'll create an API that uses the same controller in the same way (with validations etc). That's the purpose of Responses in the CRUDController (I'll read them in the WebSiteController to resolve what to do, like show a view and in the other hand with the API I'll basically return the Response.
My real problem
Convention and pattern. The MVC pattern is broken here. Controller calling another controller is wrong and I know that.
I want to know what thing I should use! Services? Is that right? I see a lot (really) of examples of services but nothing like that, working with models and reusing code, etc. I never use Services but I know how to use, but I don't know if it's right to these cases.
I really hope that someone can help here and sorry once again for the mistakes with the English. Thanks a lot.
You're calling the CRUD controller a controller but it does not behave as an MVC controller. At best it's just a helper class. You could always do this:
abstract class CRUDManager {
//As you had the CRUDController
}
class UserManager extends CRUDManager {
//As you had the UserController
}
In your AppServiceProvider:
public function boot() {
$app->bind(UserManager::class, function ($app) {
return new UserManager(request()->all()); //I guess that's what you need.
});
}
Whenever you need to use it you can do:
public function register(UserManager $user) {
$user->create();
}
Now one thing to point out. It's not a good idea to initialise the request in the constructor. You should use dependency injection in controller methods. I don't even know if the request is available when the controller is being constructed (I know the session is not). The reason why I say this is that the middleware runs after the controller is constructed and therefore the request may be modified when the controller method is called.
Another note: If you did the original solution because you needed to use certain controller methods, then you can just use the corresponding traits (because the controller itself does not really have many method). I'm guessing a trait like ValidatesRequests would be one you'd need to use.
I'll answer my own question. I use a pattern called Repository Pattern to resolve the problem (or I try to use, because it's the first time using this pattern: maybe I don't use in the right way in every steps).
Files structure
Controllers
UserController.php
Models
UserModel.php
Providers
UserRepositoryServiceProvider.php
Repositories
RepositoryInterface.php
Repository.php
User
UserRepositoryInterface.php
UserRepository.php
Traits
InternalResponse.php
With that structure I did what I wanted in my question without working just with controllers.
I create a trait called InternalResponse. That trait contains a few methods that receive a transaction, validate if it's the case and then return a Response (called "internal" in my logic because the controller will read and maybe change the Response before return it in the end).
The Repository class, which is abstract (because another class must extend it to make sense to use. In this case the class UserRepository will extend...), uses the Trait mentioned.
Well, with it in mind, it's possible to know that the UserController uses the UserRepositoryInterface, that provides an object UserRepository: because the UserRepositoryServiceProvider register this with that interface.
I think there's no need to write code here to explain, because the problem is about an pattern, and these words explain well the problem (in the question) and the resolution with this answer here.
I'll write here a conclusion, I mean, the files structure with comments to explain a little bit more, to end the answer.
Conclusion: Files structure with comments
Controllers
UserController.php
// the controller uses dependency injection and call methods of
// UserRepository, read and changes the Response receveid to finally
// create the final Response, like returning a view or the response
// itself (in the case it's an API controller)
Models
UserModel.php
// an normal model
Providers
UserRepositoryServiceProvider.php
// register the UserRepositoryInterface to
// return a UserRepository object
Repositories
RepositoryInterface.php
// the main interface for the Repository
Repository.php
// the main repository. It's an abstract class.
// All the others repositories must extend that class, because
// there's no reason to use a class Repository without an Model
// to access the database... That class share methods like create,
// read, update and delete, and the methods validate and transaction
// too because uses the trait InternalResponse.
User
UserRepositoryInterface.php
// the interface for UserRepository class
UserRepository.php
// that class extend Repository and uses the UserModel
Traits
InternalResponse.php
// trait with methods like validate and transaction. the method
// validate, read and validate the data receveid for the methods
// create and update. and all the CRUD methods uses the method
// transaction to perform the data to the database and return a
// response of that action.
That's what I do and like I said before, I don't know if it's a hundred percent correct in reference to Repository Pattern.
I hope this can help someone else too.
Thanks for all.
I am currently facing a very interesting dilemma with my architecture and implementation.
I have an interface called ServiceInterface which have a method called execute()
Then I have two different implementations for this interface: Service1 and Service2, which implements the execute method properly.
I have a controller called MainController and this controller has a "type-hint" for the ServiceInterface (dependency injection), it means that both, Service1 and Service2, can be called as resolution for that dependency injection.
Now the fun part:
I do not know which of those implementations to use (Service1 or Service2) because I just know if I can use one or other based on a user input from a previous step.
It means the user choose a service and based on that value I know if a can use Service1 or Service2.
I am currently solving the dependency injection using a session value, so depending of the value I return an instance or other, BUT I really think that it is not a good way to do it.
Please, let me know if you faced something similar and, how do you solve it, or what can I do to achieve this in the right way.
Thanks in advance. Please let me know if further information is required.
Finally, after some days of researching and thinking a lot about the best approach for this, using Laravel, I finally solved it.
I have to say that this was especially difficult in Laravel 5.2 because, in this version, the Session middleware only is executed in the controllers used in a route, it means that if for some reason I used a controller (not linked for a rote) and try to get access to the session it is not going to be possible.
So, because I cannot use the session, I decided to use URL parameters. Here you have the solution approach; I hope some of you found it useful.
so, you have an interface:
interface Service
{
public function execute();
}
Then a couple of implementations for the interface:
Service one:
class ServiceOne implements Service
{
public function execute()
{
.......
}
}
Service two.
class ServiceTwo implements Service
{
public function execute()
{
.......
}
}
The interesting part is that I have a controller with a function with a dependency with the Service interface. Still, I need to resolve it dynamically to ServiceOne or ServiceTwo based on user input. So:
The controller
class MyController extends Controller
{
public function index(Service $service, ServiceRequest $request)
{
$service->execute();
.......
}
}
Please note that ServiceRequest, validated that the request already have the parameter that we need to resolve the dependency (call it 'service_name')
Now, in the AppServiceProvider we can resolve the dependency in this way:
class AppServiceProvider extends ServiceProvider
{
public function boot()
{
}
public function register()
{
//This specific dependency is going to be resolved only if
//the request has the service_name field stablished
if(Request::has('service_name'))
{
//Obtaining the name of the service to be used (class name)
$className = $this->resolveClassName(Request::get('service_name')));
$this->app->bind('Including\The\Namespace\For\Service', $className);
}
}
protected function resolveClassName($className)
{
$resolver = new Resolver($className);
$className = $resolver->resolveDependencyName();
return $className;
}
}
So now all the responsibility is for the Resolver class. This class basically use the parameter passed to the constructor to return the full name (with namespace) of the class that is going to be used as an implementation of the Service interface:
class Resolver
{
protected $name;
public function __construct($className)
{
$this->name = $className;
}
public function resolveDependencyName()
{
//This is just an example, you can use whatever as 'service_one'
if($this->name === 'service_one')
{
return Full\Namespace\For\Class\Implementation\ServiceOne::class;
}
if($this->name === 'service_two')
{
return Full\Namespace\For\Class\Implementation\ServiceTwo::class;
}
//If none, so throw an exception because the dependency can not be resolved
throw new ResolverException;
}
}
Well, I really hope it helps some of you.
Best wishes!
---------- EDIT -----------
I just realize that it is not a good idea to use the request data directly inside the container of Laravel. It really is going to cause some trouble in the long term.
The best way is to directly register all the possible instances supported (serviceone and servicetwo) and then resolve one of them directly from a controller or a middleware, so then is the controller "who decides" what service to use (from all the available) based on the input from the request.
In the end, it works at the same, but it is going to allow you to work more naturally.
I have to say thanks to rizqi, a user from the questions channel of the slack chat of Laravel.
He personally created a golden article about this. Please read it because it solves this issue completely and in a very right way.
laravel registry pattern
The fact that you define that your controller works with ServiceInterface is ok
If you have to choose the concrete implementation of the service basing on a previous step (that, as i've understood, happens in a previous request) storing the value in session or in database is right too, as you have no alternative: to choose the implementation you have to know the value of the input
The important point is to 'isolate' the resolution of the concrete implementation from the input value in one place: for example create a method that takes this value as a parameter and returns the concrete implementation of the service from the value:
public function getServiceImplementation($input_val)
{
switch($input_val)
{
case 1 : return new Service1();
case 2 : return new Service2();
}
}
and in your controller:
public function controllerMethod()
{
//create and assign the service implementation
$this->service = ( new ServiceChooser() )->getServiceImplementation( Session::get('input_val') );
}
In this example i've used a different class to store the method, but you can place the method in the controller or use a Simple Factory pattern, depending on where the service should be resolved in your application
It's an interesting problem. I'm currently using Laravel 5.5 and have been mulling it over. I also want my service provider to return a specific class (implementing an interface) based upon user input. I think it's better to manually pass the input from the controller so it's easier to see what's going on. I would also store the possible values of the class names in the config.
So based upon the Service classes and interface you've defined above i came up with this:
/config/services.php
return [
'classes': [
'service1' => 'Service1',
'service2' => 'Service2',
]
]
/app/Http/Controllers/MainController.php
public function index(ServiceRequest $request)
{
$service = app()->makeWith(ServiceInterface::class, ['service'=>$request->get('service)]);
// ... do something with your service
}
/app/Http/Requests/ServiceRequest.php
public function rules(): array
$availableServices = array_keys(config('services.classes'));
return [
'service' => [
'required',
Rule::in($availableServices)
]
];
}
/app/Providers/CustomServiceProvider.php
class CustomServiceProvider extends ServiceProvider
{
public function boot() {}
public function register()
{
// Parameters are passed from the controller action
$this->app->bind(
ServiceInterface::class,
function($app, $parameters) {
$serviceConfigKey = $parameters['service'];
$className = '\\App\\Services\\' . config('services.classes.' . $serviceConfigKey);
return new $className;
}
);
}
}
This way we can validate the input to ensure we are passing a valid service, then the controller handles passing the input from the Request object into the ServiceProvider. I just think when it comes to maintaining this code it will be clear what is going on as opposed to using the request object directly in the ServiceProvider.
PS Remember to register the CustomServiceProvider!
I find the best way to deal with this is using a factory pattern. You can create a class say ServiceFactory and it has a single method create() it can accept an argument which is used to dynamically choose which concrete class to instantiate.
It has a case statement based on the argument.
It will use App::make(ServiceOne::class) or App::make(ServiceTwo::class).depending on which one is required.
You are then able to inject this into your controller (or service which depends on the factory).
You can then mock it in a service unit test.
Recently, I had to implement a similar logic where I was to implement a method to perform mobile top-ups for multiple networks in our application. So, I decided to implement the logic using Factory and Bridge pattern. Factory to create an instance of the concrete Service class based on the user input, and then, the Bridge pattern to set closely related classes into separate hierarchies and route the request to the respective class.
In the controller's method, both Factory and Service classes are injected. The TopUpServiceFactory's create method creates an object of the concrete class. The TopUpService class then routes the request to that concrete class method.
class TopUpController extends Controller
{
public function topUp(Request $request, TopUpServiceFactoryInterface $serviceFactory, TopUpServiceInterface $topUpService)
{
$serviceFactory->create($request->networkCode);
$topUpService->TopUp($request->all());
}
}
The TopUpServiceFactoryInterface and TopUpServiceInterface are bound to TopUpServiceFactory and TopUpService concrete Classes respectively in Service Container.
class AppServiceProvider extends ServiceProvider
{
public function register()
{
$this->app->bind(TopUpServiceFactoryInterface::class, TopUpServiceFactory::class);
$this->app->bind(TopUpServiceInterface::class, TopUpService::class);
}
}
The create method accepts user input and creates an object of the respective class based on the user input.
class TopUpServiceFactory implements TopUpServiceFactoryInterface
{
public function create(string $networkCode)
{
switch ($networkCode) {
case 'network1':
app()->bind(NetworkServiceInterface::class, Network1Service::class);
break;
case 'network2':
app()->bind(NetworkServiceInterface::class, Network2Service::class);
break;
default:
app()->bind(NetworkServiceInterface::class, DefaultNetworkService::class);
break;
}
}
}
The Service Class then picks the object of NetworkService Class and forwards the request.
class TopUpService implements TopUpServiceInterface
{
public function topUp(array $requestParams)
{
$networkService = app()->get(NetworkServiceInterface::class);
$networkService->topUp($requestParams);
}
}
All network's concrete classes implement a common interface NetworkServiceInterface, which is used to inject dependency dynamically, implementing Liskov Substitution Principle
class Network1Service implements NetworkServiceInterface
{
public function topUp(array $requestParam)
{
Process Topup ......
}
}
class Network2Service implements NetworkServiceInterface
{
public function topUp(array $requestParam)
{
Process Topup ......
}
}
...
I Need some advice, as I'm still a bit new to Laravel and MVC in general. I'm coding a small web application that presents some data on the page, fetched from a remote API. However, the page already has a controller to it. The other controller I will be using I'm hoping I can also reuse it for other pages. I'm pretty stuck here.
So the two controllers
HomeController.php
ApiController.php
The HomeController is the original controller, which gets the view file (home.blade.php), with some other data that's being loaded from the controller.
With the ApiController, I want to fetch the api (json) results, do some changes and then load those changes to the HomeController as well. The changes would be like an array of methods and such that's being loaded to the view.
So How can I load both controllers inside of the same view?
First of all controllers doesn't get loaded inside view instead, you should load a view from a controller and to make the remote request for an API call you don't need to use another controller but you may use it if you have other use of API and need a separate controller. The flow is something like this:
class HomeController extends BaseController {
public function index()
{
// make the api call/remote request
// modify the returned data
// load the view
}
}
Let's rewrite it:
class HomeController extends BaseController {
protected $apiService = null;
public function __construct(ApiService $apiService)
{
$this->apiService = $apiService;
}
public function index()
{
// make the api call/remote request
$apiData = $this->apiService->makeRequest();
// modify the returned data.... then...
// load the view
return View::make(...)->with('apiData', $apiData);
}
}
So, it seems clear that, you should use the API related process in a separate class as a service, maybe a model or a simple repository class and inject it to your HomeController then use it from the controller.
Do all the API stuffs in ApiService and call methods of that class from the HomeController, in this case you may implement the ApiServiceRepository as a concrete class by implementing an interface, i.e. ApiService. So, finally it could be like this:
interface ApiService {
public function makeRequest();
}
// Implement the interface in concrete class
class ApiServiceRepository implements ApiService {
public function makeRequest()
{
// $data = make remote request
// return $data
}
}
Use the class HomeController with __construct as given above and add a IoC binding like:
App::bind('ApiService', 'ApiServiceRepository');
So, you don't have to worry about the dependency injection in the constructor of your HomeController.
BTW, to use a method from another controller, for example ApiController from HomeController you may use something like this:
$apiController = App::make('ApiController');
// Call any method of "ApiController" class/object
$apidata = $apiController->makeCallToMethod();
You may also check this article for understanding the use of repository pattern in Laravel.
I am working on building a lightweight MVC, mainly for the learning process but I would like it to be good enough to use eventually.
Below is a basic example/demo of how a basic controller might would look, let's assume the URI has been processed and routed to this controller and these 2 methods.
1) I need to get data from database/cache/etc... inside my Model classes, I just need help on how I should load my models into my example controller below, you can see that I have added this below $profileData = $this->model->getProfile($userId) that is just made up and does not exist's, how could I get something like that to work though? Or should I load the model into the class a different way?
2) A lot of pages will require a user to be logged into the site. SHould I process that part below in the controller to check if a user is logged in, example, before building the profile page, check if user is logged in, if not then build a login page instead and add these checks inside of each controller method/page?
/**
* Example Controller
*/
class User_Controller extends Core_Controller {
// domain.com/user/id-53463463
function profile($userId)
{
//GET data from a Model
$profileData = $this->model->getProfile($userId);
$this->view->load('userProfile', $profileData);
}
// domain.com/user/friends/
function friends()
{
//GET data from a Model
$friendsData = $this->model->getFriendlist();
$this->view->load('userFriends', $friendsData);
}
}
core
abstract class Core_Controller {
protected $view;
protected $model;
function __construct(DependencyContainer $dependencyContainer){
$this->view = new Core_View();
//$this->view = $dependencyContainer->get(view);
}
}
There are probably tons of ways to accomplish what you are trying.
The "easiest" is probably to just override the constructor and instantiate the model directly.
in User_Controller:
public function __construct(DependencyContainer $dc) {
parent::__construct($dc);
$this->model = new User_Model();
}
I'm guessing that you are looking for something a little more automated though. If you want the Model to have the same name as the controller minus "_Controller", just use get_class($this) in the constructor and use PHP's string functions to parse out what you want. Once you have that in a variable, you can use that variable to instantiate the model:
in Core_Controller:
public function __construct(DependencyContainer $dc) {
$this->view = new Core_View();
// $model_class should be 'User_Model' now
$model_class = str_replace('_Controller', '_Model', get_class($this));
// now instantiate the model
$this->model = new $model_class();
}
I haven't actually worked with any framework that can only have one model associated with each controller (except may CakePHP? I can't remember). With Symfony, the models and controllers are completely decoupled so you can use any model with any controller. You just instantiate the model as need. Symfony use the Doctrine ORM so for example, in a controller action, if you needed a model you would do something like this:
$model = Doctrine::getTable('User');
It might be worthwhile to consider a design more like that in order to promote a decoupled design and I promise that you will want more than one model in some controller at some point.
2.) As far as authentication. Something that seems to be fairly common is to have some sort of setting (whether in a config file or a member variable) that says whether or not the current action needs the user to be authenticated. This is processed each time the action runs (Yii calls these kinds of things filters). If the user needs to be logged in, it stores the page that they are trying to access, and then redirects them to a log in page (you should only ever have to create one). Once they properly authenticate, it will redirect them back to where they were originally heading.