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.
Related
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($c['logger']);
};
Note: the above registration to the container could be done automatically with using PHP-DI Slim (but that should be also slower).
I am building my website in Slim 3 MVC framework.I need to call some commonly used functions for controller (Eg: For Alias of page title I am using a function called function getAlias(){.....}).
Where I have to create those functions? How can I call inside controllers?
There's a number of ways to do this. If the functions have no side effects, then one option would be to have a utilities class with static methods in it it.
Another option would be to extend all your route actions from a common class and use that:
// CommonAction.php
class CommonAction
{
protected function getAlias() { }
}
// HomeAction.php
class HomeAction extends CommonAction
{
public function __construct(/*dependencies here*/) { }
public function __invoke($request, $response, $args) {
// route action code here
return $response;
}
}
// index.php
$app = new Slim\App(require('settings.php'));
$container = $app->getContainer();
$container[HomeAction::class] = function ($c) {
return new HomeAction(/*dependencies*/);
}
$app->get('/', HomeAction::class);
$app->run();
If the functionality is part of your domain layer, then inject those classes into your route actions as a dependency.
I'm trying to inject a dependency into my Silex Controller, because I need an object of type user in my controller and handle some stuff with it.
$app->mount("/users", new \MyApp\Controller\Provider\User($user));
And I implemented the controller by implementing the ControllerProviderInterface:
class User implements ControllerProviderInterface{
protected $user;
public function __construct($user){
//...
}
public function connect(Application $app)
{
//...
}
}
The routes and the methods are all set up in the controller. Without the dependency injection everything works fine. But as long as I edit the code and add the injection I get the following error:
Missing argument 1 for ...::__construct()
When I create the object, I send that parameter to it, but somehow Silex creates an instance before with a constructor without passing any argument.
Another approach is to use a ServiceController instead of a ControllerProvider. You can achieve a more familiar dependency injection feel this way.
$app->register(new Silex\Provider\ServiceControllerServiceProvider());
$app["user"] = function () {
return new User();
};
$app["user.controller"] = function () use ($app) {
return new UserController($app["user"]);
};
$app->get("/users/{id}", "user.controller:get");
...
class User implements UserInterface
{
// ...
}
...
class UserController
{
protected $user;
public function __construct(UserInterface $user)
{
$this->user = $user;
}
public function get(Request $request, $id)
{
$this->user;
// Do stuff
}
}
Reference: http://silex.sensiolabs.org/doc/providers/service_controller.html
Silex takes a different approach to dependency injection than you might be used to or might expect. Silex\Application is the dependency injection container that is available in almost any context in a Silex application. You register your dependencies with the $app and those dependencies are injected via the $app in any context you might need it. Here is an example of something you might do in your situation.
$app["user"] = function () {
return new \MyApp\Service\User();
};
$app->mount("/users", new \MyApp\Controller\Provider\User());
...
class User implements ControllerProviderInterface
{
public function connect(Application $app)
{
$controller = $app["controller_factory"];
$controller->get("/{id}", array($this, "get"));
return $controller;
}
public function get(Application $app, Request $request, $id)
{
$user = $app["user"];
// Do stuff
}
}
Dependency injection in Silex is different and it takes a little getting used to, but once you are comfortable with it, it's a pleasure to work with and it's very efficient.
This accepted answer is not the answer to the question. And the thing described in the answer is not dependency injection either, or a realy crude form of it. Its more like Hardcoding $app into your controllers.
The code in the question should work without changes. The code in the connect function and the constructor might be helpful to figure out, where your problem sits. Its not the call to mount, im sure.
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');
I'm trying to wrap my head around dependency injection and the IoC container and i'm using my UserController as an example. I'm defining what the UserController depends on in its constructor and then am binding those objects to it using App::bind(). If i'm using the Input::get() facade/method/thing am i not taking advantage of the Request object i just injected into it? Should i be using the following code instead, now that the Request object is injected or doesInput::get() resolve to the same Request instance? I'd like to use the static facades but not if they resolve to un-injected objects.
$this->request->get('email');
Dependency injection
<?php
App::bind('UserController', function() {
$controller = new UserController(
new Response,
App::make('request'),
App::make('view'),
App::make('validator'),
App::make('hash'),
new User
);
return $controller;
});
UserController
<?php
class UserController extends BaseController {
protected $response;
protected $request;
protected $validator;
protected $hasher;
protected $user;
protected $view;
public function __construct(
Response $response,
\Illuminate\Http\Request $request,
\Illuminate\View\Environment $view,
\Illuminate\Validation\Factory $validator,
\Illuminate\Hashing\BcryptHasher $hasher,
User $user
){
$this->response = $response;
$this->request = $request;
$this->view = $view;
$this->validator = $validator;
$this->hasher = $hasher;
$this->user = $user;
}
public function index()
{
//should i use this?
$email = Input::get('email');
//or this?
$email = $this->request->get('email');
//should i use this?
return $this->view->make('users.login');
//or this?
return View::make('users.login');
}
If you're worried about a testability thing then you should really only be injecting instances that aren't being routed through a facade, as the facades themselves are testable already (meaning you can mock these in L4). You shouldn't need to inject the response, hasher, view environment, request, etc. By the looks of it you only need to be injecting the $user.
For everything else I'd just stick to using the static facade. Check out the swap and shouldReceive methods on the base Facade class. You can easily swap out the underlying instance with your own mocked object or simply start mocking with, for example, View::shouldReceive().
Hope this helps.