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

The Nexus Suite is uniquely architected for a DevOps native world and creates value early in the development pipeline, provides precise contextual controls at every phase, and accelerates DevOps innovation with automation you can trust. Read how in this ebook.

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).

The DevOps Zone is brought to you in partnership with Sonatype Nexus.  See how the Nexus platform infuses precise open source component intelligence into the DevOps pipeline early, everywhere, and at scale. Read how in this ebook

Topics:

Published at DZone with permission of Jakub Holý, DZone MVB. See the original article here.

Opinions expressed by DZone contributors are their own.

THE DZONE NEWSLETTER

Dev Resources & Solutions Straight to Your Inbox

Thanks for subscribing!

Awesome! Check your inbox to verify your email so you can start receiving the latest in tech news and resources.

X

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

{{ parent.tldr }}

{{ parent.urlSource.name }}