Book Image

Hands-On Dependency Injection in Go

By : Corey Scott
Book Image

Hands-On Dependency Injection in Go

By: Corey Scott

Overview of this book

Hands-On Dependency Injection in Go takes you on a journey, teaching you about refactoring existing code to adopt dependency injection (DI) using various methods available in Go. Of the six methods introduced in this book, some are conventional, such as constructor or method injection, and some unconventional, such as just-in-time or config injection. Each method is explained in detail, focusing on their strengths and weaknesses, and is followed with a step-by-step example of how to apply it. With plenty of examples, you will learn how to leverage DI to transform code into something simple and flexible. You will also discover how to generate and leverage the dependency graph to spot and eliminate issues. Throughout the book, you will learn to leverage DI in combination with test stubs and mocks to test otherwise tricky or impossible scenarios. Hands-On Dependency Injection in Go takes a pragmatic approach and focuses heavily on the code, user experience, and how to achieve long-term benefits through incremental changes. By the end of this book, you will have produced clean code that’s easy to test.
Table of Contents (15 chapters)

Chapter 9, Just-in-Time Dependency Injection

1. How does Just-in-Time (JIT) dependency injection differ from constructor injection?

This depends a lot on how the constructor injection is being used; in particular, how many different implementations of the dependency exist. If there is only one production implementation of a dependency, then they are functionally equivalent. The only difference is UX (that is, whether there is one less dependency to inject into the constructor).

If, however, there is more than one production implementation, then JIT dependency injection cannot be used.

 

2. When working with optional dependencies, why is using a NO-OP implementation important?

When a member variable is not set by the constructor, then it is effectively optional. We cannot, therefore, be sure that the value has been set and not nil. By adding a NO-OP implementation of the optional...