Is it possible to attach an instance of a controller to the express app? about node-decorators HOT 5 CLOSED

I quickly tried to add the support myself, its currently still sort of messy, but it appears to work
TypicalFence@d783e93

The biggest Issue probably is that attachControllerInstances accepts an array of random objects. Maybe a controller should extends some other class or implement some kind of interface.

Anyway, I am not creating a pull request just yet.
Looking forward to some kind of feedback at a more reasonable time of day. 😴

from node-decorators.

@AlexFence just for the sake of curiosity, why don't you like dependency injection ? I found that very simple, intuitive and pretty much straight forward thing in TS development.

from node-decorators.

@serhiisol I like DI as a concept. What I don't like are all the DI frameworks/libraries/etc, I like to DI in a simple way, even if it means more code or less convenience.

I've used DI frameworks in Java and PHP before but I also have seen codebases where the framework was providing some native way to do DI and was simply ignored by the authors of the codebases, because they did not understand what it is and why you'd want to use it.

When a class specifies its dependencies via its constructor, it makes clear what you need to create and use the class and does not need any knowledge of the API or terminology of the DI Framework/System and does not require any third party code.

a silly example with a way too complicated Hello World Program:

interface DisplayerInterface {
    display(text);
}

class ConsoleDisplayer implements DisplayerInterface { 
    display(text) { 
        console.log(text);
    }
}

class HelloWorld { 
    private displayer: DisplayerInterface;

    constructor(displayer: DisplayerInterface) { 
        this.displayer = displayer;
    }

    hello() {
        this.displayer.display("Hello World");
    }
}

new HelloWorld(new ConsoleDisplayer()).hello();

The main benefit here is that people that are not familiar with DI frameworks, (that might even get confused by many dependencies too), can easily understand what a class needs and inject the dependencies manually, after all this is what DI is at its core. Of course this may lead to layers of passing some object down the hierarchy, but this is something I am willing to do, for less infrastructure.

So what do think about my reasoning? Maybe I haven't considered a few things.

I just really feel like an additional dependency is more "Technical debt" than actually helpful when it comes to DI.

I hope you understand where I am coming from

from node-decorators.

DI brings flexibility in general, you don't need to care about instances, DI package instantiates them for you, you don't need to deal with instantiation in general.

In general if you don't want to use DI you have two options:

1. you don't need to mark them as an Injectable and use deps directly in the constructor
2. make a pr, where you will be able to pass instances of the controllers.

from node-decorators.

Merged :D

I'll prepare release tonight

from node-decorators.