Dependency injection php website - php

The more I read about dependency injection the more I get confused. I know what it is for, that is not the problem. Trying to do some design on paper this is what I came up with and somehow it seems to me I am overlooking something.
First I imagined building an actual server that would accept incoming requests and returns responses to the user.
class Server {
private $responseBuilder;
public function __construct($responseBuilder) {
$this->responseBuilder = $responseBuilder;
}
public function run() {
// create socket, receive request
$response = $this->responsebuilder->build($request);
// send response
}
}
class Response {
private $method;
private $message;
private $url;
// getters & setters
}
class ServerBuilder {
public build() {
// construction logic
return new Server(new ResponseBuilder());
}
}
Since Apache is used to handle server requests we could replace the server with something that just send the response.
$bldr = new ResponseBuilder();
$response = $bldr->build();
// send response some way
Note that ResponseBuilder has direct access to the request ($_SERVER['..'])
and so it has everything it needs to choose the right response.
PHP however allows us to build and send responses inline. So we could have a Controller object for each page or something else that send the response and have a builder for that.
$bldr = new ControllerBuilder();
$controller = $bldr->build();
$controller->run();
class ExampleController implements Controller {
public function run() {
header("HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found");
echo 'sorry, page not found';
}
}
This all makes sense to me. But let's look at the server example again.
It calls $responseBuilder->build() and gets a response back. But this would mean that the builder (or other builders if we split it) is also responsible for anything else that might occur like authenticating a user, writing to the database,... and I can't get my head around the fact that writing to a database would be part of the object graph construction.
It would be like: Send me your request. Oh you want the homepage? I will build you your response and while I'm at it I will also do some things that have nothing to do with building it like logging what I just did and saving some of your data in a cookie and sending a mail to the administrator that you are the first visitor on this page ever, ...

You should decouple them. You have a few assumptions that I think are a bit strange. Let's start with them.
The main purpose of an incoming http request is to give back some html
I have built PHP backends that only return JSON, instead of HTML. I had a really strong border between back and front end. I only used the backend to give me data from the database, or add/edit data in the databse. The front end was just a PHP script that would build the pages any way i wanted.
Since it is the web there is in theory no use for setters since
everything can be injected in the constructor
You could use the constructor, but you don't have too. You can use setters. Dependency injection is actually just turning the flow around.
You are on the right track though. You want some class that is responsible for building your pages. So, make it only responsible for your building your pages, and take out the other responsibilities. Things like logging, authentication etc should be outside of that.
For instance if you want logging, you could have your builder create your page, and your logger could then listen to all the things your builder is doing (with the observer pattern for instance). So if your builder says: "i created the home page", you can log it with your logger, who is actually listening to your builder.
Authentication for instance should happen even before your builder starts. You don't want your builder to go to work if you can already figure out that a user is not supposed to be on a page. You could use a database for that, and whitelist any usertype/pagerequest combination.
Then for data handling, i would create a backend, that only handles requests that are supposed to give back data, or save it. The front end could then communicate to get it's content by pulling it.
I hope this clears up a few things, but I'll be happy to answer more indept questions.

Related

How can I do a partial integration test (phpunit)?

I am working on an extension (app) of nextcloud (which is based on Symfony). I have a helper class to extract data from the request that is passed by the HTTP server to PHP. A much-reduced one could be something like this (to get the point here):
<?php
namespace OCA\Cookbook\Helpers;
class RequestHelper {
public function getJson(){
if($_SERVER['Request_Method' === 'PUT'){ // Notice the typos, should be REQUEST_METHOD
$raw = file_get_content('php://input');
return json_decode($raw, true);
} else { /* ... */ }
}
}
Now I want to test this code. Of course, I can do some unit testing and mock the $_SERVER variable. Potentially I would have to extarct the file_get_content into its own method and do a partial mock of that class. I get that. The question is: How much is this test worth?
If I just mimick the behavior of that class (white box testing) in my test cases I might even copy and paste the typo I intentionally included here. As this code is an MWE, real code might get more complex and should be compatible with different HTTP servers (like apache, nginx, lighttpd etc).
So, ideally, I would like to do some automated testing in my CI process that uses a real HTTP server with different versions/programs to see if the integration is working correctly. Welcome to integration testing.
I could now run the nextcloud server with my extension included in a test environment and test some real API endpoints. This is more like functional testing as everything is tested (server, NC core, my code and the DB):
phpunit <---> HTTP server <---> nextcloud core <---> extension code <---> DB
^
|
+--> RequestHelper
Apart from speed, I have to carefully take into account to test all possible paths through the class RequestHelper (device under test, DUT). This seems a bit brittle to me in the long run.
All I could think of is adding a simple endpoint only for testing the functionality of the DUT, something like a pure echo endpoint or so. For the production use, I do not feel comfortable having something like this laying around.
I am therefore looking for an integration test with a partial mock of the app (mocking the business logic + DB) to test the route between the HTTP server and my DUT. In other words, I want to test the integration of the HTTP server, nextcloud core, my controller, and the DUT above without any business logic of my app.
How can I realize such test cases?
Edit 1
As I found from the comments the problem statement was not so obviously clear, I try to explain a bit at the cost of the simplicity of the use-case.
There is the nextcloud core that can be seen as a framework from the perspective of the app. So, there can be controller classes that can be used as targets for URL/API endpoints. So for example /apps/cookbook/recipe/15 with a GET method will fetch the recipe with id 15. Similarly, with PUT there can be a JSON uploaded to update that recipe.
So, inside the corresponding controller the structure is like
class RecipeController extends Controller {
/* Here the PUT /apps/cookbook/recipe/{id} endpoint will be routed */
public function update($id){
$json = $this->requestHelper->getJson(); // Call to helper
// Here comes the business logic
// aka calls to other classes that will save and update the state
// and perform the DB operation
$this->service->doSomething($json);
// Return an answer if the operation terminated successfully
return JsonResponse(['state'=>'ok'], 200);
}
}
I want to test the getJson() method against different servers. Here I want to mock at least the $this->service->doSomething($json) to be a no-op. Ideally, I would like to spy into the resulting $json variable to test that exactly.
No doubt, in my test class it would be something like
class TestResponseHandler extends TestCase {
public function setUp() { /* Set up the http deamon as system service */}
public testGetJson() {
// Creat Guzzle client
$client = new Client([
'base_uri' => 'http://localhost:8080/apps/cookbook',
]);
// Run the API call
$headers = ...;
$body = ...;
$response = $client->put('recipe/15', 'PUT', $headers, $body);
// Check the response body
// ....
}
}
Now, I have two code interpreters running: Once, there is the one (A) that runs phpunit (and makes the HTTP request). Second, there is the one (B) associated with the HTTP server listening on localhost:8080.
As the code above with the call to getJson() is running inside a PHP interpreter (B) outside the phpunit instance I cannot mock directly as far as I understand. I would have to change the main app's code if I am not mistaken.
Of course, I could provide (more or less) useful data in the test function and let the service->doSomething() method do its job but then I am no longer testing only a subset of functions but I am doing functional or system testing. Also, this makes it harder to generate well-aimed test cases if all these side-effects need to be taken into account.

Should a class be able to hold an instance of itself?

I am currently busy with a PSR-7 project with responses and requests.
Currently we are setting up an application in our index.php by doing something like:
$app = new Application();
$app->loadConfiguration(
'../config/global.yml',
);
// Should return the response?
$app->run((new ServerRequestFactory())->createServerRequestFromGlobals());
Here the run method also calls an emit method that is responsible for sending the headers and printing the body of the response.
The request and respons are now linked together in one call which makes it hard to test since you don't want to send the response with the headers straight to PHPUnit.
I have removed the emit call in the chain of the run method and added this to the index after the run method call:
// Send the response.
$app->send();
This way they are decoupled but the downside is I now have to hold a instance of my response in a response property inside my Application.php($app) class.
I want to move the response instance to the response class itself but my co-workers thinks a class should never hold an instance of itself. Yet when I look at frameworks this happens quite a lot. Is he right about this?
What arguments can I make to decouple my request and response besides easier testing?
I am pretty new to unit testing, one of the arguments I have already heard is that I should not test the full application anyways but rather separate components and therefore should not be worried about de-coupling the request and response.

PHP MVC: How to exit from Actions/Controllers early?

In a PHP MVC framework, how can I cleanly and elegantly exit from the current controller/action, but continue normal script execution?
For example, let's say my framework normally follows this outline:
Map URL to Controller/Action
Instantiate Controller, call Action (capturing output)
Do stuff
Render View
At end of Action method, continue normal operation
Process output if necessary
Send output to browser
Now, let's say I want to stop "normal" execution somewhere in the "Do Stuff" step to, say, render a different view, or do a header redirect, and I want to stop processing the rest of the body of the Action, but continue onto the "Process output" step
How can I achieve this the best way? My only ideas are:
//in controller
protected function redirect($url) {
header("Location: $url");
exit();
}
but this entirely skips the rest of the framework's execution, and dumps whatever was in the output buffer straight to the user. An alternative:
//in dispatcher
call_user_func_array(array($controller,$action),$params);
afterwards:
...
//in controller
protected function redirect($url) {
header("Location: $url");
goto afterwards;
}
However, this makes me twitch and goes against everything I've learned, especially because the label it's referencing is in another file completely.
So, is there any other way to achieve this?
Note: The redirect example probably should use the exit() way, because we're just redirecting to another page anyway and don't care about output. I'm looking for a general-use solution.
In your Action method, you can collect all of your output in a string rather than printing it out. Print it out only at the end of the method. If you need to redirect or bail out, then you haven't output anything yet and you can either redirect or return from the method.
Perhaps you could write a custom exception to represent a "Stop normal execution in the 'Do Stuff'" step? It's messy... but it would work.
you need to abstract much more things. dont just output inside a action! dont set headers as there can go so much wrong before. have different handlers. response handler. handle respons and act depending what you respond. dont just output inside actions. if you have errors throw exceptions catch them with a exceptionhadler and so on.
basic controller action
public function view(int $user_id): ResponseHandler {
$this->validate($user_id); //throws exception
if (1 == 2) throw new ControllerInvalidArgumentException();
$view = new View('nameof view');
return new ResponseHandler($view);
}
just have a look at existing frameworks they have very good implemntations of design patterns like laravel or symfony. not sure what you try just dont write your own framework. if you want to learn read and learn from others if you understand whyt they do you will know how to do.

Best Practice for returning cross-site JSON response

I'm currently working on a small application that works like this:
When the user clicks a link, an Ajax GET request is fired.
The request hits a server-side PHP script.
The script, which requests information for another domain, retrieves a JSON feed.
The feed is then echoed back to the client for parsing.
I'm not really a PHP developer, so I am looking for some best practices with respect to cross-domain requests. I'm currently using file_get_contents() to retrieve the JSON feed and, although it's functional, it seems like a weak solution.
Does the PHP script do anything other than simply call the other server? Do you have control over what the other server returns? If the answers are No and Yes, you could look into JSONP.
You might want to abstract the retrieval process in PHP with an interface so you can swap out implementations if you need too. Here is a naive example:
interface CrossSiteLoader
{
public function loadURL($url);
}
class SimpleLoader implements CrossSiteLoader
{
public function loadURL($url)
{
return file_get_contents($url);
}
}
Comes in handy if you need to test locally with your own data because you can use a test implementation:
public ArrayLoader implements CrossSiteLoader
{
public function loadURL($url)
{
return json_encode(array('var1' => 'value1', 'var2' => 'value2'));
}
}
or if you just want to change from file_get_contents to something like curl

How to design error reporting in PHP

How should I write error reporting modules in PHP?
Say, I want to write a function in PHP: 'bool isDuplicateEmail($email)'.
In that function, I want to check if the $email is already present in the database.
It will return 'true', if exists. Else 'false'.
Now, the query execution can also fail, In that time I want to report 'Internal Error' to the user.
The function should not die with typical mysql error: die(mysql_error(). My web app has two interfaces: browser and email(You can perform certain actions by sending an email).
In both cases it should report error in good aesthetic.
Do I really have to use exception handling for this?
Can anyone point me to some good PHP project where I can learn how to design robust PHP web-app?
In my PHP projects, I have tried several different tacts. I've come to the following solution which seems to work well for me:
First, any major PHP application I write has some sort of central singleton that manages application-level data and behaviors. The "Application" object. I mention that here because I use this object to collect generated feedback from every other module. The rendering module can query the application object for the feedback it deems should be displayed to the user.
On a lower-level, every class is derived from some base class that contains error management methods. For example an "AddError(code,string,global)" and "GetErrors()" and "ClearErrors". The "AddError" method does two things: stores a local copy of that error in an instance-specific array for that object and (optionally) notifies the application object of this error ("global" is a boolean) which then stores that error for future use in rendering.
So now here's how it works in practice:
Note that 'Object' defines the following methods: AddError ClearErrors GetErrorCodes GetErrorsAsStrings GetErrorCount and maybe HasError for convenience
// $GLOBALS['app'] = new Application();
class MyObject extends Object
{
/**
* #return bool Returns false if failed
*/
public function DoThing()
{
$this->ClearErrors();
if ([something succeeded])
{
return true;
}
else
{
$this->AddError(ERR_OP_FAILED,"Thing could not be done");
return false;
}
}
}
$ob = new MyObject();
if ($ob->DoThing())
{
echo 'Success.';
}
else
{
// Right now, i may not really care *why* it didn't work (the user
// may want to know about the problem, though (see below).
$ob->TrySomethingElse();
}
// ...LATER ON IN THE RENDERING MODULE
echo implode('<br/>',$GLOBALS['app']->GetErrorsAsStrings());
The reason I like this is because:
I hate exceptions because I personally believe they make code more convoluted that it needs to be
Sometimes you just need to know that a function succeeded or failed and not exactly what went wrong
A lot of times you don't need a specific error code but you need a specific error string and you don't want to create an error code for every single possible error condition. Sometimes you really just want to use an "opfailed" code but go into some detail for the user's sake in the string itself. This allows for that flexibility
Having two error collection locations (the local level for use by the calling algorithm and global level for use by rendering modules for telling the user about them) has really worked for me to give each functional area exactly what it needs to get things done.
Using MVC, i always use some sort of default error/exception handler, where actions with exceptions (and no own error-/exceptionhandling) will be caught.
There you could decide to answer via email or browser-response, and it will always have the same look :)
I'd use a framework like Zend Framework that has a thorough exception handling mechanism built all through it.
Look into exception handling and error handling in the php manual. Also read the comments at the bottom, very useful.
There's aslo a method explained in those page how to convert PHP errors into exceptions, so you only deal with exceptions (for the most part).

Categories