bryanhuntesl
A popular Java and C# design pattern is runtime dependency infection.
People tend to associate it with Object Oriented programming but there is nothing inherent to OOP.
Runtime dependency injection/resolution can work for any system that provides a runtime mechanism to override or modify the version of a class or module which has been requested.
It strikes me that Mox provides a limited form of dependency injection in that sense.
Now I’m not advocating for it, but just for the sake of idle discussion (and I do know about Application.env and regular configuration stuff) has anyone ever attempted bringing Java style DI to Elixir?
Trending in Discussions
As the title says, please share what you’ve been up to with Elixir. Whether that’s been learning it, looking into it, making stuff with i...
New
The obligatory hello world thread!
Who are you and where are you from? :stuck_out_tongue:
New
@chrismccord : I just saw the Extract AGENTS.md from Phoenix.new into phx.new generator commit to the phoenix project.
My initial shotgu...
New
I was working on an Ecto migration and I needed a timestamp. So, for the nth time, I looked up the different data types for timestamps, a...
New
Fly’s CEO posted this recently - Turn And Face The Strange · The Fly Blog
It says that Fly is going all-in on sprites, which is a worry ...
New
We’re evaluating API mocking tools for OpenAPI-based projects and would love to hear what other teams are using.
We’re particularly inte...
New
Is there a word for the ~> symbol used in Version strings?
Do you also just call it a Squiggle Arrow™ ?!
New
Other Trending Topics
Hey, I’m Jesse and I’m the main contributor behind Dexter, a full-featured, lightning-fast Elixir LSP optimized for large codebases. It s...
New
Hobbes is a low-level distributed database for the Elixir programming language.
Hobbes provides a simple, safe, and scalable storage lay...
New
Beam Bots (or just BB for short) is a framework for building fault-tolerant robotics applications in Elixir using familiar OTP patterns. ...
New
ExRatatui lets you cook up rich terminal UIs in Elixir, powered by Rust’s ratatui via Rustler NIFs. Build interactive terminal applicatio...
New
Corex is an accessible, unstyled UI component library for Phoenix that integrates Zag.js state machines using Vanilla JavaScript and Live...
New
Hello everyone. After busy few months I am happy to announce v0.1.0 of Emerge & Solve.
They are GUI (Emerge) and State management (S...
New
Chat & Discussions>Discussions
Latest on Elixir Forum
Categories:
Sub Categories:
Forums
Popular Tags
- #ecto
- #liveview
- #troubleshooting
- #learning-elixir
- #deployment
- #library
- #erlang
- #testing
- #genserver
- #mix
- #absinthe
- #remote-other
- #otp
- #plug
- #how-to-question
- #macros
- #postgres
- #channels
- #elixirconf
- #exunit
- #discussion
- #code-sync
- #javascript
- #podcasts
- #onsite
- #dialyzer
- #docker
- #authentication
- #umbrella
- #full-time-contract
- #podcasts-by-brainlid
- #ecto-query
- #elixir-ls
- #blog-post
- #ai
- #phoenix_html
- #iex
- #graphql
- #elixirconf-us
- #genstage
- #websockets
- #supervisor
- #advent-of-code
- #distillery
- #processes
- #api
- #forms
- #hex
- #security
- #metaprogramming










Showing Posts 1 to 10- Show Best Posts
- Show All (oldest first)
- Show All (newest first)
hauleth
I just pass modules as a function arguments where needed. In other cases I just do not bother at all.
pablodavila
In which cases would you pass a module as an argument? Do you mean a module when it’s a GenServer?
dorgan
I think an example of this would be Ecto. In cases like
Ecto.Multi, the repo module is passed around so you can make sure you’re using the same repo during a transaction: Ecto.Multi — Ecto v3.14.0A case where I did that was when doing something similar to the strategy pattern, I had many modules that were candidates to perform a given action, and when one of them was picked, I passed them around to the functions that would use it
fireproofsocks
For sure I do this: if you want to achieve testable code, it’s quite handy to be able to “inject” overrides as options. E.g. something like the following:
This is over-simplified, perhaps, but if you don’t want to redundantly test a separate module that receives dispatches, then providing an injectable/overridable option lets you focus on one layer/module at a time.
Some purists may argue that this isn’t the same as DI, but it accomplishes the same goals and has the same intent as far as I’m concerned. Mox is certainly helpful in this regard, but it’s not strictly required.
al2o3cr
Beware that this approach converts compile-time errors (like passing the wrong number of arguments to a function) to runtime errors, and substantially reduces the usefulness of Dialyzer.
Wrapping the call can help some:
This allows Dialyzer to understand the type of
client_get- but there is no checking that the type written in the@specmatches the types actually seen at runtime.mudasobwa
Usually, we have a
Clientbehaviour here, declaring a type, and refine the spec topaulstatezny
There are libraries that have different “adapters” for use in production, development, and test environments. This is sort of similar to dependency injection.
Take the Swoosh hex library for sending emails. You set the adapter (a module that follows a behaviour) in configuration. In production, you choose an adapter corresponding to your email service — say, the SendGrid adapter. In test, you use the Test adapter which is wired up to allow you to perform assertions on whether an email was sent and if it contained the right data. In development, you use a special adapter that captures “sent emails” in memory in a process, so that you can go to a special local route and view what would have been sent were it production.
Aetherus
I think this is a problem of how to ensure the passed-in module has the expected
@behaviourusing typespec.marcin
Freud intensifies :-))))
mathieuprog
I was a fan of dependency injection containers when I was working with object-oriented web frameworks. Alternatives were a service locator or a global registry/singleton, which were both considered anti-patterns. When you work with a DI container, your classes typically keep the dependencies as state in the constructors.
In Elixir we just don’t need those anymore, it’s a just a different way of thinking and designing. We use config and functions arguments.
Even though the OP didn’t mention containers, I believe dependency injection is more talked about in OOP because it is harder to achieve.
And as an example of how DI is achieved in Elixir, take the injection of a time zone database to
DateTimefunctions:or: