Skip to main content

Using Extensions Methods for DI setup

This days I saw a pretty nice idea of implementing the setup part of a DI container – when you make the setup from code and not from configuration file.
Usually when you are working with DI on a big project, you a piece of code for each component (assembly) that register into the container the instances for that component - ContainerInstaller. When you start the application or load a specific container you need to call that specific class end register all the items for that class.
public class FooInstaller
{
    public void Install(IContainer container)
    {
        container.Register<...>(...);    
        container.Register<...>(...);    
    }
}
This can be made automatically, if you define an interface like IInstaller. Using reflection or other mechanism you can automatically find this installers and run them.
Another solution that I think that is pretty interesting is to define an extension method for each component (assembly) – an extension method of builder. Each component will define internally his own extension method that do the same think as the installer.
public static class FooContainerExtension
{
    public static void AdFoo(this IContainer container)
    {
        container.Register<...>(...);    
        container.Register<...>(...);    
    }
}
In the main entry point of the application, you will need to call the extension method for each component.
container.AddFoo();
container.AddCore();
container.AddAzureStorageSupport();
This is a nice feature for develops, that don’t need anymore to look over documentation to see which installer they need to call and so on.
Of course this is not a perfect solution and will not work for big project where you need automatically to make this setup. Also, because you define an extension method directly to a specific builder (or container) you will have a direct dependency to the DI container (but how often you change it?).
In conclusion I would say that this is an interesting solution, that can be used with success for small project. This could be a great solution when you define a stack that will be used by others. They will be able to see directly what kind of installer they have available. AND, in the end the extension method can forward the call to an installer class.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How to audit an Azure Cosmos DB

In this post, we will talk about how we can audit an Azure Cosmos DB database. Before jumping into the problem let us define the business requirement: As an Administrator I want to be able to audit all changes that were done to specific collection inside my Azure Cosmos DB. The requirement is simple, but can be a little tricky to implement fully. First of all when you are using Azure Cosmos DB or any other storage solution there are 99% odds that you’ll have more than one system that writes data to it. This means that you have or not have control on the systems that are doing any create/update/delete operations. Solution 1: Diagnostic Logs Cosmos DB allows us activate diagnostics logs and stream the output a storage account for achieving to other systems like Event Hub or Log Analytics. This would allow us to have information related to who, when, what, response code and how the access operation to our Cosmos DB was done. Beside this there is a field that specifies what was th...

Can User Technical Profile Influence AI Architecture Decisions?

In the last few days, I ran a small experiment on Devin/Windsurf/Cascade, BMAD, and LLM-based architecture decisions. The initial concern was simple: if an AI coding assistant knows something about the user, for example, that the user is a Java developer or a .NET developer, can this information influence the architecture and technology stack that the AI will propose? This question is important because many companies are starting to use AI tools not only for coding but also for product discovery, architecture, documentation, and technical decision-making. If the AI is influenced by the developer's personal profile, the result may not be fully neutral. It may look like a business or architecture decision, but in reality, it may be partially shaped by the context of the person using the tool. The test was done using BMAD with Devin/Windsurf/Cascade. The scenario was a unified field service operations platform. The task was to let BMAD refine the product, define the architecture and s...

ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded

Today blog post will be started with the following error when running DB tests on the CI machine: threw exception: System.InvalidOperationException: The Entity Framework provider type 'System.Data.Entity.SqlServer.SqlProviderServices, EntityFramework.SqlServer' registered in the application config file for the ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded. Make sure that the assembly-qualified name is used and that the assembly is available to the running application. See http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=260882 for more information. at System.Data.Entity.Infrastructure.DependencyResolution.ProviderServicesFactory.GetInstance(String providerTypeName, String providerInvariantName) This error happened only on the Continuous Integration machine. On the devs machines, everything has fine. The classic problem – on my machine it’s working. The CI has the following configuration: TeamCity .NET 4.51 EF 6.0.2 VS2013 It see...