We Keep Coding

Dynamically injecting generic objects with guice

My current situation:
I want to inject the following class into my application:
public interface IConfigAccessor<T extends IConfig> {
...
}
ConfigAccessors are a proxy-objects, created dynamically at runtime. The creation of these object works as follows:
public class ConfigFactory implements IConfigFactory {
private final IConfigUpdater updater;
#Inject
public ConfigFactory(IConfigUpdater updater) {
this.updater = updater;
}
#Override
public <T extends IConfig> IConfigAccessor<T> register(final String configKey, final Class<T> configClass) {
ConfigCache<T> configCache = new ConfigCache<>(new SomeOtherThings(), configKey, configClass);
updater.register(configCache);
return new ConfigAccessor<>(configCache, configKey, configClass);
}
}
As you can see, to create these objects, I need to inject the ConfigUpdater and other depdencies. This means, that guice needs to be fully configured already.
To get the instance out of Guice, I use the following code:
IConfigFactory configClient = injector.getInstance(IConfigFactory.class);
IConfigAccessor<ConcreteConfig> accessor = configClient.register("key", ConcreteConfig.class)
How I want to inject them via Guice:
Currently, I can get the requried objects, but I have to manually pass them around in my application.
Instead, what I want to have is the following:
public class SomeClass {
#Inject
public SomeClass(#Config(configKey="key") IConfigAccessor<ConcreteConfig> accessor) {
// hurray!
}
}
What's the correct approach/technology to get this working?
After a lot of research, I'm feeling a bit lost on how to approach this topic. There are a lot of different things Guice offers, including simple Providers, custom Listeners which scan classes and identify custom annotations, FactoryModuleBuilders and more.
My problem is quite specific, and I'm not sure which of these things to use and how to get it working. I'm not even sure if this is even possible with Guice?
Edit: What I have so far
I have the following annotation which I want to use inside constructor paramters:
#Target({ ElementType.FIELD, ElementType.PARAMETER })
#Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
public #interface InjectConfig {
String configKey();
}
Inside the module, I can bind a provider to IConfigAccessor (with the above annotation) as such:
bind(IConfigAccessor.class).annotatedWith(InjectConfig.class)
.toProvider(new ConfigProvider<>());
However, there are two problems whith this:
The provider cannot provide IConfigAccessor. To create such an instance, the provider would need an IConfigUpdater, but since I use 'new' for the provider, I can't inject it.
Inside the provider, there is no way to find out about the configKey used in the Annotation.
Second approach:
Let's assume that I already know all configurations and configKeys I want to inject during startup. In this case, I could loop over all possible configKeys and have the following binding:
String configKey = "some key";
final Class<? extends IConfig> configClass =...;
bind(IConfigAccessor.class).annotatedWith(Names.named(configKey))
.toProvider(new ConfigProvider<>(configKey, configClass));
However, problem (1) still resides: The provider cannot get an IConfigUpdater instance.

The main problem here is that you cannot use the value of the annotation in the injection. There is another question which covers this part:
Guice inject based on annotation value
Instead of binding a provider instance, you should bind the provider class, and get the class by injecting a typeliteral.
That way, your config factory can look like that:
public class ConfigFactory<T extends IConfig> implements IConfigFactory {
#Inject private final IConfigUpdater updater;
#Inject private TypeLiteral<T> type;
#Override
public IConfigAccessor<T> register(final String configKey) {
Class<T> configClass = (Class<T>)type.getRawType();
ConfigCache<T> configCache = new ConfigCache<>(new SomeOtherThings(), configKey, configClass);
updater.register(configCache);
return new ConfigAccessor<>(configCache, configKey, configClass);
}
}
And then SomeClass:
public class SomeClass {
#Inject
public SomeClass(ConfigFactory<ConcreteConfig> accessor) {
ConcreteConfig config = accessor.register("key");
}
}
Since SomeClass needs to know "key" anyway, this is not too much a change information-wise. The downside is that the SomeClass API now gets a factory instead of the concrete config.
[EDIT]
And here is someone who actually did inject annotated values using custom injection.

How to access configuration in a Lagom service at startup?

I am migrating my current app in Spring/J2EE to Lagom. I am working in Java. I need to read variables from the configuration (application.conf in resources folder). In the implementation module, I try to inject configuration as a class variable like this
#Inject
private Configuration config
but when I access this config object in the constructor, it gives null pointer exception.
The whole code is like this
import play.Configuration;
public class SomeServiceImpl implements SomeService {
#Inject
private Configuration config;
public SomeServiceImpl() {
//getting configuration from application.conf
// gives exception as config is null.
String key = config.getString(“key”);
}
#Override
public ServiceCall<Request, Response> send() {
//works here, does not give exception
String key = config.getString(“key”);
}
}
Sorry, I should have been clear from the beginning. I have edited the original question. I get null pointer exception when I try to read from configuration object in constructor but I am able to use it in service call implementation. I want some way in which I can access the configuration in application.conf at startup and possibly store in some config class which can be accessed anywhere later.

In Java, when an object is instantiated, the first thing that happens (before anything else can possibly happen) is the constructor is invoked. After that, frameworks like Guice (which Lagom uses) are free to inject things, but they can't do it until the constructor has been invoked. So, all your #Inject annotated fields will be null when the constructor is invoked, there is nothing you can do to work around that.
So, don't use field injection, use constructor injection, eg:
import play.Configuration;
public class SomeServiceImpl implements SomeService {
private final Configuration config;
#Inject
public SomeServiceImpl(Configuration config) {
this.config = config;
String key = config.getString("key");
}
#Override
public ServiceCall<Request, Response> send() {
String key = config.getString("key");
}
}
Constructor injection is not just recommended for this use case, you should be using it everywhere, it avoids all these potential issues.

Java Spring #Valid on a method call [duplicate]

Hej,
I want to use the #Validated(group=Foo.class) annotation to validate an argument before executing a method like following:
public void doFoo(Foo #Validated(groups=Foo.class) foo){}
When i put this method in the Controller of my Spring application, the #Validated is executed and throws an error when the Foo object is not valid. However if I put the same thing in a method in the Service layer of my application, the validation is not executed and the method just runs even when the Foo object isn't valid.
Can't you use the #Validated annotation in the service layer ? Or do I have to do configure something extra to make it work ?
Update:
I have added the following two beans to my service.xml:
<bean id="validator" class="org.springframework.validation.beanvalidation.LocalValidatorFactoryBean"/>
<bean class="org.springframework.validation.beanvalidation.MethodValidationPostProcessor"/>
and replaced the #Validate with #Null like so:
public void doFoo(Foo #Null(groups=Foo.class) foo){}
I know it is a pretty silly annotation to do but I wanted to check that if I call the method now and passing null it would throw an violation exception which it does. So why does it execute the #Null annotation and not the #Validate annotation ? I know one is from javax.validation and the other is from Spring but I do not think that has anything to do with it ?

In the eyes of a Spring MVC stack, there is no such thing as a service layer. The reason it works for #Controller class handler methods is that Spring uses a special HandlerMethodArgumentResolver called ModelAttributeMethodProcessor which performs validation before resolving the argument to use in your handler method.
The service layer, as we call it, is just a plain bean with no additional behavior added to it from the MVC (DispatcherServlet) stack. As such you cannot expect any validation from Spring. You need to roll your own, probably with AOP.
With MethodValidationPostProcessor, take a look at the javadoc
Applicable methods have JSR-303 constraint annotations on their
parameters and/or on their return value (in the latter case specified
at the method level, typically as inline annotation).
Validation groups can be specified through Spring's Validated
annotation at the type level of the containing target class, applying
to all public service methods of that class. By default, JSR-303 will
validate against its default group only.
The #Validated annotation is only used to specify a validation group, it doesn't itself force any validation. You need to use one of the javax.validation annotations like #Null or #Valid. Remember that you can use as many annotations as you would like on a method parameter.

As a side note on Spring Validation for methods:
Since Spring uses interceptors in its approach, the validation itself is only performed when you're talking to a Bean's method:
When talking to an instance of this bean through the Spring or JSR-303 Validator interfaces, you'll be talking to the default Validator of the underlying ValidatorFactory. This is very convenient in that you don't have to perform yet another call on the factory, assuming that you will almost always use the default Validator anyway.
This is important because if you're trying to implement a validation in such a way for method calls within the class, it won't work. E.g.:
#Autowired
WannaValidate service;
//...
service.callMeOutside(new Form);
#Service
public class WannaValidate {
/* Spring Validation will work fine when executed from outside, as above */
#Validated
public void callMeOutside(#Valid Form form) {
AnotherForm anotherForm = new AnotherForm(form);
callMeInside(anotherForm);
}
/* Spring Validation won't work for AnotherForm if executed from inner method */
#Validated
public void callMeInside(#Valid AnotherForm form) {
// stuff
}
}
Hope someone finds this helpful. Tested with Spring 4.3, so things might be different for other versions.

#pgiecek You don't need to create a new Annotation. You can use:
#Validated
public class MyClass {
#Validated({Group1.class})
public myMethod1(#Valid Foo foo) { ... }
#Validated({Group2.class})
public myMethod2(#Valid Foo foo) { ... }
...
}

Be careful with rubensa's approach.
This only works when you declare #Valid as the only annotation. When you combine it with other annotations like #NotNull everything except the #Valid will be ignored.
The following will not work and the #NotNull will be ignored:
#Validated
public class MyClass {
#Validated(Group1.class)
public void myMethod1(#NotNull #Valid Foo foo) { ... }
#Validated(Group2.class)
public void myMethod2(#NotNull #Valid Foo foo) { ... }
}
In combination with other annotations you need to declare the javax.validation.groups.Default Group as well, like this:
#Validated
public class MyClass {
#Validated({ Default.class, Group1.class })
public void myMethod1(#NotNull #Valid Foo foo) { ... }
#Validated({ Default.class, Group2.class })
public void myMethod2(#NotNull #Valid Foo foo) { ... }
}

As stated above to specify validation groups is possible only through #Validated annotation at class level. However, it is not very convenient since sometimes you have a class containing several methods with the same entity as a parameter but each of which requiring different subset of properties to validate. It was also my case and below you can find several steps to take to solve it.
1) Implement custom annotation that enables to specify validation groups at method level in addition to groups specified through #Validated at class level.
#Target({ElementType.METHOD})
#Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
#Documented
public #interface ValidatedGroups {
Class<?>[] value() default {};
}
2) Extend MethodValidationInterceptor and override determineValidationGroups method as follows.
#Override
protected Class<?>[] determineValidationGroups(MethodInvocation invocation) {
final Class<?>[] classLevelGroups = super.determineValidationGroups(invocation);
final ValidatedGroups validatedGroups = AnnotationUtils.findAnnotation(
invocation.getMethod(), ValidatedGroups.class);
final Class<?>[] methodLevelGroups = validatedGroups != null ? validatedGroups.value() : new Class<?>[0];
if (methodLevelGroups.length == 0) {
return classLevelGroups;
}
final int newLength = classLevelGroups.length + methodLevelGroups.length;
final Class<?>[] mergedGroups = Arrays.copyOf(classLevelGroups, newLength);
System.arraycopy(methodLevelGroups, 0, mergedGroups, classLevelGroups.length, methodLevelGroups.length);
return mergedGroups;
}
3) Implement your own MethodValidationPostProcessor (just copy the Spring one) and in the method afterPropertiesSet use validation interceptor implemented in step 2.
#Override
public void afterPropertiesSet() throws Exception {
Pointcut pointcut = new AnnotationMatchingPointcut(Validated.class, true);
Advice advice = (this.validator != null ? new ValidatedGroupsAwareMethodValidationInterceptor(this.validator) :
new ValidatedGroupsAwareMethodValidationInterceptor());
this.advisor = new DefaultPointcutAdvisor(pointcut, advice);
}
4) Register your validation post processor instead of Spring one.
<bean class="my.package.ValidatedGroupsAwareMethodValidationPostProcessor"/>
That's it. Now you can use it as follows.
#Validated(groups = Group1.class)
public class MyClass {
#ValidatedGroups(Group2.class)
public myMethod1(Foo foo) { ... }
public myMethod2(Foo foo) { ... }
...
}

Make a static variable injectable

i am building a http API client that needs to call out to a specific endpoint like so:
public class MyApiClient {
private static final String ENDPOINT ="http://myapi....";
}
Here the endpoint won't change so its constant. However, I want to be able to override this for testing so that I can test against a mock http server for example.
Whats the best way to do this? Is it just to make it an instance variable and provide it with a starting value:
private String endpoint = ="http://myapi....";
public void setEndpoint(String endpoint){
...
}

Well, there are of course many solutions to this and one way of doing it is to use a system property with a default value:
private static final String DEFAULT_ENDPOINT = "http://myapi....";
private static final String ENDPOINT =
System.getProperty("my.endpoint", DEFAULT_ENDPOINT);
This way you get a configurable way of solving your problem. If you need even more flexibility when initializing your static constants you could also use a static initializer:
private static final String ENDPOINT;
static {
// do initialization here but do not throw any exceptions (bad practice)
// you can e.g. read from files etc...
// Then assign your constant...
ENDPOINT =
}
System properties are passed on the command line as -D parameters e.g:
java -Dmy.endpoint=http://...
But in my opinion, an even better approach is to actually inject the value to the class that is using it:
public class ClassThatIsUsingTheConfig {
private final String endpoint;
public ClassThatIsUsingTheConfig(final String endpoint) {
this.endpoint = endpoint;
}
public void someMethod() {
// use endpoint
}
}
And then, make the selection of which endpoint to use in the caller class. From a test case, this will be very easy to mock.
public class MyTest {
#Test
public void testMethod() {
ClassThatIsUsingTheConfig var = new ClassThatIsUsingTheConfig(TEST_ENDPOINT);
var.someMethod();
}
}
public class MyProdClass {
public void prodMethod() {
ClassThatIsUsingTheConfig var = new ClassThatIsUsingTheConfig(PROD_ENDPOINT);
var.someMethod();
}
}
You can read more about dependency injection here.
On a side note, if you are using some kind of framework for managing dependencies such as Spring Framework or CDI it is common to be able to inject properties and constants in various ways (e.g. based on which environment that is currently running). An example, when using Spring Framework you can declare all your constants in a property file and inject the property using annotations:
#Autowired
public ClassWhoIsUsingTheConfig(#Value("my.endoint") final String endpoint) {
this.endpoint = endpoint;
}
The property file for prod could be along the lines of:
my.endpoint=http://prodserver...
wheras the property file for test would look like this:
my.endpoint=http://testserver...
The approach of using a Dependency Injection engine allows for a very flexible way of handling external constants, paths, resources etc and simplifies your life when it comes to testing the code.

Changing Guice bindings at runtime

I would like to be able to change the Guice injections at runtime to support multiple injections based on user input. This is what I would like to achieve:
public interface IDao {
public int someMethod();
}
public class DaoEarth implements IDao {
#Override
public int someMethod(){ ... }
}
public class DaoMars implements IDao {
#Override
public int someMethod(){ ... }
}
public class MyClass {
#Inject
private IDao myDao;
public int myMethod(String domain) {
//If Domain == Earth, myDao should be of the type DaoEarth
//If Domain == DaoMars, myDao should be of the type DaoMars
}
}
I was thinking of writing my own Provider, but I don't know how to use that provider to change my bindings at runtime. Any input is welcome and appreciated :)!
Update
Here's what I currently came up with, it's not as pretty as I'd like, so I'm still looking for feedback
public class DomainProvider {
#Inject #Earth
private IDaoProvider earthDaoProvider;
#Inject #Mars
private IDaoProvider marsDaoProvider;
public IDaoProvider get(Domain domain){
switch (domain){
case EARTH:
return earthDaoProvider;
case MARS:
return marsDaoProvider;
}
}
public IDaoProvider get(String domain){
Domain parsedDomain = Domain.valueOf(domain.toUpperCase());
return get(parsedDomain);
}
}
//MarsDaoProvider would be equivalent
public class EarthDaoProvider implements IDaoProvider {
#Inject #Earth
private IDao earthDao;
public IDao getDao() {
return earthDao;
}
}
// This means that in "MyClass", I can do:
public class MyClass {
#Inject
private DomainProvider domainProvider;
public int myMethod(String domain) {
IDaoProvider daoProvider = domainProvider.get(domain);
IDao dao = daoProvider.getDao();
//Now "dao" will be of the correct type based on the domain
}
}
//Of course elsewhere I have the bindings set like
bind(IDao.class).annotatedWith(Earth.class).to(EarthDao.class);

Your version is almost perfect as it is: You're going to need to inject some kind of object that returns one or the other based on code you write, and don't need assisted injection or anything like that. That said, you can skip some of the boilerplate:
public class DomainProvider {
// Just inject Providers directly without binding them explicitly.
#Inject #Earth Provider<IDao> earthDaoProvider;
#Inject #Mars Provider<IDao> marsDaoProvider;
public Provider<IDao> get(Domain domain){
switch (domain){
case EARTH:
return earthDaoProvider;
case MARS:
return marsDaoProvider;
}
}
public Provider<IDao> get(String domain){
Domain parsedDomain = Domain.valueOf(domain.toUpperCase());
return get(parsedDomain);
}
}
Your MyClass in that case would be exactly identical. Here, Provider is either the one-method generic interface com.google.inject.Provider, or the equivalent builtin javax.inject.Provider that it extends. Read more about Guice Providers on the relevant Guice wiki topic.
bind(IDao.class).annotatedWith(Earth.class).to(EarthDao.class);
// You can now inject "#Earth IDao" and also "#Earth Provider<IDao>".
Basically, if you bind a key Foo (to a class, provider, #Provides method, or instance), you automatically get to inject either a Foo or Provider<Foo> with no additional work. Providers are also a great way to ensure that you get a new instance with every call to get, if that's what you want; with your original, you'll always get the same instance of EarthDao or MarsDao for any given DomainProvider you inject. (If you have a scoped binding like #Singleton, Guice will respect that too; Provider just lets Guice get involved, rather than reusing a plain old Java reference.)
This means you can skip your custom EarthDaoProvider and MarsDaoProvider, unless you really need to perform any external initialization on them—at which point you'd probably be better off calling bind(EarthDao.class).toProvider(EarthDaoProvider.class) so the preparation also happens when injecting EarthDao directly. You could also just have DomainProvider return an IDao instance directly by calling get on the appropriate Provider, and be assured that it'll be a new instance every time.