Over a million developers have joined DZone.
{{announcement.body}}
{{announcement.title}}

How I Learned to Avoid Magical Dependency Injection And Love Plain Java

DZone's Guide to

How I Learned to Avoid Magical Dependency Injection And Love Plain Java

· DevOps Zone ·
Free Resource

Discover the all-in-one test automation solution that increases quality and shortens release cycles with the most challenging applications.

A short story about the complexity of magical frameworks and dependency injection with a happy ending, featuring Resteasy, CDI, and JBoss.

Once upon time, I have created a JAX-RS webservice that needed to supply data to a user’s session. I wanted to be fancy and thus created a @Singleton class for the exchange of information between the two (since only a user request serving code can legally access her session, a global data exchange is needed). However sharing the singleton between the REST service and JSF handler wasn’t so easy:

  • Originally, the singleton was generic: OneTimeMailbox<T> – but this is not supported by CDI so I had to create a derived class (annotated with @Named @Singleton)
  • While everything worked in my Arquillian test, at runtime I got NullPointerException because the @Inject-ed mailbox was null in the service, for reasons unclear. According to the internets, CDI and JAX-RS do not blend well unless you use ugly tricks such as annotating your service with @RequestScoped (didn’t help me) or use JBoss’ resteasy-cdi module.

Finally I got fed up by all the complexity standing in my way and reverted to plain old Java singleton (OneTimeMailbox.getInstance()) while making testing possible with multiple instances by having  a setter  an alternative constructor taking the mailbox on each class using it (the service and JSF bean) (using a constructor might be even better).

Result? Actually better testability and simpler code.

Bjørn Borud and Johannes Brodwall were right – plain old Java is better than magical frameworks and magical DI is evil. (Though they would diapprove of JBoss and likely prefered if I used a plain servlet instead of JAX-RS for my very simple case.)

Update: As pointed out by Daniel Kolman now and others previously, dependency injection itself isn’t bad (though some would argue), it is only magic DI that is a problem. You can well do DI yourself using plain old Java – see Bakksjø: The inverse of IoC is ControlPerry: Do-It-Yourself Dependency Injection (pdf; quote: “[..] shows how dependency injection can be accomplished without any framework. The same benefits provided by frameworks can be realized using “do-it-yourself” (DIY) handcrafted code.“; recommended by Google’s test master Miško Hevery who is a fan of DI because it helps with testability).

Can you release faster without sacrificing quality? See how with our free ebook Strategies for a Successful Test Automation Project and a free trial of Ranorex Studio today!

Topics:

Published at DZone with permission of

Opinions expressed by DZone contributors are their own.

{{ parent.title || parent.header.title}}

{{ parent.tldr }}

{{ parent.urlSource.name }}