Slim php - access container from middleware - php

I am trying to access the $container from my middleware, but i am not getting much luck.
In my index.php file I have
require '../../vendor/autoload.php';
include '../bootstrap.php';
use somename\Middleware\Authentication as Authentication;
$app = new \Slim\App();
$container = $app->getContainer();
$app->add(new Authentication());
And then I have a class Authentication.php like this
namespace somename\Middleware;
class Authentication {
public function __invoke($request, $response, $next) {
$this->logger->addInfo('Hi from Authentication middleware');
but i get an error
Undefined property: somename\Middleware\Authentication::$logger in ***
I have also tried adding the following constructor to the class but I also get no joy.
private $container;
public function __construct($container) {
$this->container = $container;
}
Could anyone help please?

Best Practice to Middleware Implementation is Something like this :
Place this code inside your dependency section :
$app = new \Slim\App();
$container = $app->getContainer();
/** Container will be passed to your function automatically **/
$container['MyAuthenticator'] = function($c) {
return new somename\Middleware\Authentication($c);
};
then inside your Authentication class create constructor function like you mentioned :
namespace somename\Middleware;
class Authentication {
protected $container;
public function __invoke($request, $response, $next)
{
$this->container->logger->addInfo('Hi from Authentication middleware');
}
public function __construct($container) {
$this->container = $container;
}
/** Optional : Add __get magic method to easily use container
dependencies
without using the container name in code
so this code :
$this->container->logger->addInfo('Hi from Authentication middleware');
will be this :
$this->logger->addInfo('Hi from Authentication middleware');
**/
public function __get($property)
{
if ($this->container->{$property}) {
return $this->container->{$property};
}
}
}
After inside your index.php add Middleware using name resolution like this:
$app->add('MyAuthenticator');

I disagree with Ali Kaviani's Answer. When adding this PHP __magic function (__get), the code will be a lot more difficult to test.
All the required dependencies should be specified on the constructor.
The benefit is, that you can easily see what dependencies a class has and therefore only need to mock these classes in unit-tests, otherwise you would've to create a container in every test. Also Keep It Simple Stupid
I'll show that on the logger example:
class Authentication {
private $logger;
public function __construct($logger) {
$this->logger = $logger;
}
public function __invoke($request, $response, $next) {
$this->logger->addInfo('Hi from Authentication middleware');
}
}
Then add the middleware with the logger parameter to the container:
$app = new \Slim\App();
$container = $app->getContainer();
$container['MyAuthenticator'] = function($c) {
return new somename\Middleware\Authentication($c['logger']);
};
Note: the above registration to the container could be done automatically with using PHP-DI Slim (but that should be also slower).

Related

Use parameters in Symfonybundle in service class

I have Symfony bundle called upload images:
I want to use parameters in my bundle in my class.
This is my parameter file:
upload-images:
image:
crop_size: 300
My files:
Configuration.php
class Configuration implements ConfigurationInterface
{
public function getConfigTreeBuilder()
{
$treeBuilder = new TreeBuilder('upload-images');
$treeBuilder->getRootNode()
->children()
->arrayNode('image')
->children()
->integerNode('save_original')->end()
->scalarNode('crop_size')->end()
->end()
->end() // twitter
->end();
return $treeBuilder;
}
}
UploadImagesExtension.php
class UploadImagesExtension extends Extension
{
public function load(array $configs, ContainerBuilder $container)
{
$loader = new YamlFileLoader($container, new FileLocator(dirname(__DIR__).'/Resources'));
$loader->load('services.yaml');
$configuration = new Configuration();
$config = $this->processConfiguration($configuration, $configs);
}
}
And final my service class:
Rotate.php
And in this class I want the parameter: crop_size
I tried the ParameterBagInterface:
use Symfony\Component\DependencyInjection\ParameterBag\ParameterBagInterface;
class Rotate
{
private $params;
public function __construct(ParameterBagInterface $params)
{
$this->params = $params;
}
public function Rotate()
{
$cropSize = $params->get('crop_size');
}
}
UserController.php
use verzeilberg\UploadImagesBundle\Service\Rotate;
class UserController extends AbstractController
{
/** #var UserProfileService */
private $service;
private $userService;
public function __construct(
UserProfileService $service,
UserService $userService
) {
$this->service = $service;
$this->userService = $userService;
}
/**
* #param UserInterface $user
* #return Response
*/
public function profile(UserInterface $user)
{
$rotate = new Rotate();
$rotate->Rotate();
.....
...
}
Getting this error:
Too few arguments to function verzeilberg\UploadImagesBundle\Service\Rotate::__construct(), 0 passed in /home/vagrant/projects/diabetigraph-dev/src/Controller/User/UserController.php on line 62 and exactly 1 expected
I have search for a solution. But did not came accross the right one.
According to the latest edit, the error is pretty obvious: if you want to use dependency injection, you have to use it. Calling $rotate = new Rotate(); without any constructor parameters will fail, as Symfony cannot inject them for you.
Instead, inject it through the action:
public function profile(UserInterface $user, Rotate $rotate)
... this will use Symfony's container and inject the ParameterBagInterface, if you have enabled autowiring. If not, you have to write the proper service definitions to get this done
The error you are getting is not directly related to your question.
Either it is an autowiring issue, or maybe you are trying to instanciate the service manually? Please share what you are doing here: UserController.php on line 62
Anyway, to answer your question:
To access the parameters from the parameter bag you will have to set them in the extension.
$container->setParameter('my_bundle.config', $config);
Also, injecting the whole ParameterBag is fine for a project, but should be avoided for a bundle.
Use the DI config to inject just your parameter, OR make your extension implement CompilerPassInterface, and override the definition there. (It may be overkill for such a simple task)

Laravel 5.6 "Unresolvable dependency resolving..." when doing dependency injection

I am trying to bind a class into the container via a middleware and it doesn't seem to work because the class that I am binding recieved 2 parameters in the constructor and they aren't recognised.
I am getting the following error message: "Unresolvable dependency resolving [Parameter #0 [ $base_url ]] in class App\Services\Factureaza".
Here is the middleware:
<?php
namespace App\Http\Middleware;
use App\Services\Factureaza;
use Closure;
class InitializeInvoiceProvider
{
public function handle($request, Closure $next)
{
app()->singleton(Factureaza::class, function () {
// get settings by calling a custom helper function
$settings = json_decode(get_setting('invoicing_provider_settings'), true);
$api_url = isset($settings['url']) ? $settings['url'] : null;
$api_key = isset($settings['key']) ? $settings['key'] : null;
return new Factureaza($api_url, $api_key);
});
return $next($request);
}
}
The Factureaza class looks like this:
<?php
namespace App\Services;
use GuzzleHttp\Client as GuzzleClient;
use GuzzleHttp\Exception\ClientException;
use GuzzleHttp\Exception\RequestException;
class Factureaza
{
protected $client;
protected $base_url;
protected $api_key;
public function __construct($base_url, $api_key)
{
$this->client = new GuzzleClient([
'base_uri' => $base_url,
'verify' => false,
'auth' => [$api_key, 'x'],
]);
$this->base_url = $base_url;
$this->api_key = $api_key;
}
}
I am getting this error when I am trying to resolve the dependency in my controller:
<?php
class InvoicesController extends Controller
{
protected $api;
public function __construct()
{
$this->api = resolve('App\Services\Factureaza');
}
}
Your binding should be in a Service Provider. The middleware you have isn't ran until after that Controller has been instantiated. There is no singleton bound to the container at this point. The bind is too late in the life cycle to be able to be there for a controller that a route is being dispatched to.
Laravel instantiates the Controller before it runs the route middleware. It needs to do this to be able to gather the middleware that a controller can define in its constructor to build the middleware stack.
Update:
Some Possible work arounds (did not test) without refactoring:
1) Use method injection instead of trying to get an instance in the constructor:
public function show(Factureaza $factureaza, ...)
2) Use a closure middleware defined in the constructor of the controller to get an instance and assign it.
public function __construct()
{
$this->middleware(function ($request, $next) {
$this->api = resolve(Factureaza::class);
return $next($request);
});
}
Hopefully the middleware that sets the information that the singleton needs has ran before this controller middleware.
3) Have a middleware set this api on the controller for you ... would require adding a method to the controllers to take this information.
You have access to the controller for the route as it has already be instantiated and assigned to the Route.
$request->route()->getController()->setApi(...);

Slim Framework 3 - How to inject $logger to route controller

I am using Slim Framework 3. I want to inject $logger defined in dependencies.php into a Router Controller class. Below is what I do, is there a better way?
routes.php
$app->get('/test', function($request, $response, $args){
$controller = new AccountController($this->get('logger'));
return $controller->test($request, $response, $args);
});
AccountController
class AccountController{
private $logger;
function __construct($logger){
$this->logger = $logger;
}
public function test($request, $response, $args){
$this->logger->info('i am inside controller');
return $response->withHeader('Content-Type', 'application/json')->write('test');
}
}
In Slim Framework 3 documentation, the proper way of using a Route Controller should be:
$app->get('/test', 'AccountController:test');
But how do I inject $logger into AccountController when I choose to code my Route Controller in this more "elegant" way?
In terms of making your controller easier to test, you should inject the logger into the controller via the constructor.
AccountController looks like this:
class AccountController
{
protected $logger;
public function __construct($logger) {
$this->logger = $logger;
}
public function test($request, $response, $args){
$this->logger->info('i am inside controller');
return $response->withJson(['foo' => 'bar']);
}
}
Set up in index.php is something like:
$container = $app->getContainer();
$container[Logger::class] = function ($c) {
$logger = new \Monolog\Logger('logger');
return $logger;
};
$container[AccountController::class] = function ($c) {
$logger = $c->get(Logger::class);
return new AccountController($logger);
};
$app->get('/test', 'AccountController:test');
Note that if you make the format route callable be a string of 'class name' colon 'method name', then Slim 3 will call the method for you after extracting the controller class from the DI container. If the class name is not a registered key with the container, then it will instantiate it and pass the container to the constructor.
According to the container resolution docs, you should be able to access your logger through the container, inside your controller:
AccountController
class AccountController
{
protected $ci;
//Constructor
public function __construct(ContainerInterface $ci)
{
$this->ci = $ci;
}
public function test($request, $response, $args)
{
$this->ci->get('logger')->info('i am inside controller');
return $response->withHeader('Content-Type', 'application/json')->write('test');
}
}
When you call $app->get('/test', 'AccountController:test');, Slim should automatically pass the container into AccountController's constructor.
That being said, this is more of a convenience feature than an example of great design. As Rob Allen explains in his answer, you can achieve better modularity, and thus more easily tested code (if you're using unit tests), by injecting the controllers into the application container, rather than injecting the container into each controller.
Take a look at his example Slim application. If you look at, for example AuthorController, you can see how with this design controller classes no longer depend on the magical container providing all the services. Instead, you explicitly state which services each controller will need in the constructor. This means you can more easily mock the individual dependencies in testing scenarios.

Custom BaseController in Silex

I have created a simple aplication in Silex 1.3.4 and I want to have a base controller that will have a __construct method accepting $app and $request. All inheriting controllers then should have their respective constructors and calling the parent controller construct method.
//Use statements here....
class AppController
{
public function __construct(Application $app, Request $request){
$this->app = $app;
$this->request = $request;
}
}
Inheriting controllers would be written as below:
//Use statements here....
class ItemsController extends AppController
{
public function __construct(Application $app, Request $request){
parent::__construct($app, $request);
}
public function listAction()
{
//code here without having to pass the application and request objects
}
}
The approach I have decided on routing is as shown below:
$app->post(
'/items/list', 'MySilexTestDrive\Controller\ItemsController::listAction'
)->bind('list');
I was thinking of using the dispatcher and override some processes there and create my controller instances my own way but I do not have any idea how and if this is a great idea at all.
Anyone who has done something similar to this? Please help.
You can use ServiceControllerServiceProvider to define your controller as a service in the application. But you can't inject a Request in that way. BTW you can have more than one request and the request instance can change if you do sub-request. You can inject RequestStack instead, then call $requestStack->getCurrentRequest() when you need to get the current request.
$app = new Silex\Application();
abstract class AppController
{
protected $app;
protected $requestStack;
public function __construct(Silex\Application $app, Symfony\Component\HttpFoundation\RequestStack $requestStack)
{
$this->app = $app;
$this->requestStack = $requestStack;
}
public function getRequest()
{
return $this->requestStack->getCurrentRequest();
}
}
class ItemsController extends AppController
{
public function listAction()
{
$request = $this->getRequest();
// ...
}
}
$app->register(new Silex\Provider\ServiceControllerServiceProvider());
$app['items.controller'] = $app->share(function() use ($app) {
return new ItemsController($app, $app['request_stack']);
});
$app->get('/items/list', "items.controller:listAction");
It makes sense to do such a thing? I do not think so. Especially if the framework gives you a request instance thanks to the type hinting. Just do
public function listAction(Application $app, Request $request)
{
// ...
}
and work with that.
You can try this too :
class BaseController
{
protected $app;
protected $request;
public function __call($name, $arguments)
{
$this->app = $arguments[0];
$this->request = $arguments[1];
return call_user_func_array(array($this,$name), [$arguments[0], $arguments[1]]);
}
protected function getSystemStatus(Application $app, Request $request)
{
[...]
}
[...]
}
#Rabbis and #Federico I have come up with a more elegant solution for this where I have created a BeforeControllerExecuteListener that I dispatch with my application instance. This listener accepts the FilterControllerEvent object and then from my base controller I call a method where I inject both the Silex Application and the request from the event.
public function onKernelController(FilterControllerEvent $event)
{
$collection = $event->getController();
$controller = $collection[0];
if($controller instanceof BaseControllerAwareInterface){
$controller->initialize($this->app, $event->getRequest());
}
}
The I simple dispatch this in my bootstrap file as shown below:
$app['dispatcher']->addSubscriber(new BeforeControllerExecuteListener($app));
This allows me to have access to this object without having to add them as parameters on my actions. Below is how one of my actions in the making looks:
public function listAction($customer)
{
$connection = $this->getApplication()['dbs']['db_orders'];
$orders= $connection->fetchAll($sqlQuery);
$results = array();
foreach($orders as $order){
$results[$order['id']] = $order['number'] . ' (' . $order['customer'] . ')';
}
return new JsonResponse($results);
}
If the currently running controller being called honors the BaseControllerAwareInterface interface as I have defined it then it means I should inject that controller with the Application and Request instances. I leave the controllers to deal with how they manage the Response of each action as with my example above I may need the Response object itself of JsonResponse even any other type of response so it entirely depends on the controller to take care of that.
Then the routing remains as simply as:
$app->match('/orders/list/{cusstomer}', 'Luyanda\Controller\OrdersController::listAction')
->bind('list-orders');

Access app in class in Slim Framework 3

Im having trouble understanding how to access the instance of Slim when a route is in a seperate class than index.php
When using Slim Framework 2 I always used the following, but its not working in Slim 3:
$this->app = \Slim\Slim::getInstance();
Im trying to access a database connection I have setup in the container, but from a separate class. This is what I currently got in my index.php to initiate a Slim app:
require_once("rdb/rdb.php");
$conn = r\connect('localhost');
$container = new \Slim\Container;
$container['rdb'] = function ($c){return $conn;}
$app = new \Slim\App($container);
And here is my route:
$app->get('/test','\mycontroller:test');
And this is what I got in my mycontroller.php class which my route points to, which obviously is not working as $this->app doesn't exist:
class mycontroller{
public function test($request,$response){
$this->app->getContainer()->get('rdb');
}
The error message is the following, due to getinstance not being part of Slim 3 compared to Slim 2:
Call to undefined method Slim\App::getInstance()
Grateful for any help,
Regards
Dan
Have a look at the Slim 3 Skeleton created by Rob Allen.
Slim 3 heavily uses dependency injection, so you might want to use it too.
In your dependencies.php add something like:
$container = $app->getContainer();
$container['rdb'] = function ($c) {
return $conn;
};
$container['Your\Custom\Class'] = function ($c) {
return new \Your\Custom\Class($c['rdb']);
};
And in your Your\Custom\Class.php:
class Class {
private $rdb;
function __construct($rdb) {
$this->rdb = $rdb;
}
public function test($request, $response, $args) {
$this->rdb->doSomething();
}
}
I hope this helps, if you have any more questions feel free to ask.
Update:
When you define your route like this
$app->get('/test', '\mycontroller:test');
Slim looks up \mycontroller:test in your container:
$container['\mycontroller'] = function($c) {
return new \mycontroller($c['rdb']);
}
So when you open www.example.com/test in your browser, Slim automatically creates a new instance of \mycontroller and executes the method test with the arguments $request, $response and $args.
And because you accept the database connection as an argument for the constructor of your mycontroller class, you can use it in the method as well :)
With Slim 3 RC2 and onwards given a route of:
$app->get('/test','MyController:test');
The CallableResolver will look for a key in the DIC called 'MyController' and expect that to return the controller, so you can register with the DIC like this:
// Register controller with DIC
$container = $app->getContainer();
$container['MyController'] = function ($c) {
return new MyController($c->get('rdb'));
}
// Define controller as:
class MyController
{
public function __construct($rdb) {
$this->rdb = $rdb;
}
public function test($request,$response){
// do something with $this->rdb
}
}
Alternatively, if you don't register with the DIC, then the CallableResolver will pass the container to your constructor, so you can just create a controller like this:
class MyController
{
public function __construct($container) {
$this->rdb = $container->get('rdb');
}
public function test($request,$response){
// do something with $this->rdb
}
}
I created the following base controller and extended from that. Only just started playing with Slim but it works if you need access to to the DI in your controllers.
namespace App\Controllers;
use Interop\Container\ContainerInterface;
abstract class Controller
{
protected $ci;
/**
* Controller constructor.
*
* #param ContainerInterface $container
*/
public function __construct(ContainerInterface $container)
{
$this->ci = $container;
}
/**
* #param $name
* #return mixed
*/
public function __get($name)
{
if ($this->ci->has($name)) {
return $this->ci->get($name);
}
}
}
Then in your other controllers you can use it like this.
namespace App\Controllers;
/**
* Class HomeController
*
* #package App\Controllers
*/
class HomeController extends Controller
{
/**
* #param $request
* #param $response
* #param $args
* #return \Slim\Views\Twig
*/
public function index($request, $response, $args)
{
// Render index view
return $this->view->render($response, 'index.twig');
}
}
Important
I upvoted #mgansler and you should read that first if dealing with slim 3, and read this only if interested in differences to slim 2.
Update
So it seems those usages were just old code no one cleaned.
However im leaving this post here as it should be helpful to anyone using Slim 2 (as slim 3 is very much still beta) and as a referance point to help see differences.
Old Update (see above)
Following update of OP, i looked at github source code and found that getInstance is still very much there, but with some slight differences perhaps...
https://github.com/slimphp/Slim/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=getInstance
Test files (which maybe outdated, but unlikely) show something like this:
public function testGetCallableAsStaticMethod()
{
$route = new \Slim\Route('/bar', '\Slim\Slim::getInstance');
$callable = $route->getCallable();
$this->assertEquals('\Slim\Slim::getInstance', $callable);
}
But at the same time we see calls like this in some files, which are obviously contextual and either return diff object ($env) or are in same static file (Slim.php)
$env = \Slim\Environment::getInstance(true);
static::getInstance();
But this does show the static function still exists, so use my examples below and try to figure out why not working for you in current form.
Also, this 'maybe' of interest, as only obvious example of slim3 in usage: https://github.com/akrabat/slim3-skeleton
Though other projects prob exist, search with github filters if still having issues.
Original Answer content
Please include more detail on the route and the other class, but here are 3 ways, with execution examples detailed further down.
This info does relate to Slim Framework 2, not the Slim 3 beta, but slim 3 beta shows similar example code and makes no mention of overhauling changes, and in fact links to the Slim 2 documentation: http://docs.slimframework.com/configuration/names-and-scopes/
$this->app->getContainer()->get('rdb');
// Recommended approach, can be used in any file loaded via route() or include()
$app = \Slim\Slim::getInstance();
Slim::getInstance();
App::config('filename');
Slim3 Beta has only one code example, which looks like this:
$app = new \Slim\App();
// which would by extension mean that this 'might' work too
$app = \Slim\App::getInstance();
// but be sure to try with slim2 naming just in case
$app = \Slim\Slim::getInstance()
Though obviously this doesnt fit outside of index.php, but is consistent with Slim2 doco showing GetInstance works.
Which one fits you?
I have multiple files that use these different approaches, though i cant say what fits best as too little context on how this external class fits in and what its composition is.
For example, my controllers (which are endpoints of most my routes) use the same approach, through a base class or just direct:
class ApiBaseController /// extends \BaseController
{
protected $app;
protected $data;
public function __construct()
{
$this->app = Slim\Slim::getInstance();
$this->data = array();
}
//...
}
class VideoApiController extends \ApiBaseController
{
// ...
public function embed($uid)
{
// trace($this->app->response->headers());
$vid = \R::findOne('videos'," uid = ? ",array($uid));
if(!empty($vid))
{
// embed logic
}else{
// see my baseclass
$this->app->render('api/404.html', array(), 404);
}
}
// ...
// Returns the video file, keeping actual location obscured
function video($uid)
{
require_once(APP_PATH.'helpers/player_helper.php');
$data = \R::findOne('videos'," uid = ? ",array($uid));
/// trace($_SERVER); die();
if($data)
{
stream_file($data['filename']);
}else{
$app = \Slim\Slim::getInstance();
$app->render('404.html');
}
/// NOTE - only same domain for direct /v/:uid call
header('Access-Control-Allow-Origin : '.$_SERVER['HTTP_HOST']);
// header('X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN');
// Exit to be certain nothing else returned
exit();
}
//...
}
My helper files show code like this:
function get_permissions_options_list($context = null)
{
if(empty($context)) $context = 'user';
return App::config('permissions')[$context];
}
My middleware:
function checkAdminRoutePermissions($route)
{
$passed = runAdminRoutePermissionsCheck($route);
if($passed)
return true;
// App::notFound();
// App::halt(403, $route->getPattern());
if(!Sentry::check())
App::unauthorizedNoLogin();
else
App::unauthorized();
return false;
}
Thats example of how i access in the various files, though the code you shared already shows that you have used the recommended approach already
$app = \Slim\Slim::getInstance();
Though again, need more info to say for sure how your external file fits in, but if its at the end of a route or in an 'include()', then it should work.
You said your old approach didnt work though, but gave no info on what the actual result vs expected result was (error msg, ect), so if this doesnt work please update the OP.
This was a tough one. #mgansler answer was really helpful, but in his answer he passed a database connection, and not exactly $app inside the controller
Following the same idea it is possible to send $app though.
First inside your dependencies.php you need to grab the $app and throw it in a container to inject it to the Controller later.
$container['slim'] = function ($c) {
global $app;
return $app;
};
Then you got to inject it:
// Generic Controller
$container['App\Controllers\_Controller'] = function ($c) {
return new _Controller($c->get('slim'));
};
Now on your controller.php:
private $slim;
/**
* #param \Psr\Log\LoggerInterface $logger
* #param \App\DataAccess $dataaccess
* #param \App\$app $slim
*/
public function __construct(LoggerInterface $logger, _DataAccess $dataaccess, $slim)
{
$this->logger = $logger;
$this->dataaccess = $dataaccess;
$this->slim = $slim;
}
Now you just got call it like this:
$this->slim->doSomething();

Categories