Develop Reference

Guice FactoryModuleBuilder an instance with constructor parameters

I´m using Guice to initalize a class with some arguments from a config file
#Provides
#Singleton
RetryServiceCaller provideMaxRetryAttempts(#Named("config") JsonObject config) throws IOException {
JsonObject retryDetails = config.getJsonObject("retry_details");
return new RetryServiceCaller(retryDetails.getInteger("maxRetryAttempts"), retryDetails.getInteger("upperBoundary"), retryDetails.getInteger("lowerBoundary"),
retryDetails.getLong("multiplicationFactor"), retryDetails.getInteger("timeout"), retryDetails.getInteger("increaseTimeout"));
}
This class is injected in another class which is singleton as well.
class A{
#Inject private RetryServiceCaller retryServiceCaller;
}
But now the problem is that since this new class A is singleton, I need to clone the retryServiceCaller every time that somebody use this class A.
I´ve been investigating FactoryModuleBuilder to use it and create a factory for this class. But since the class has parameters from the config file I could not find the way to make it works.
Something like this
class A{
#Inject private RetryServiceCaller.Factory retryServiceCallerFactory;
}
Then in my RetryServiceCaller implement this
public interface Factory {
#Inject
RetryServiceCaller create();
}
#Inject
public RetryServiceCaller(int maxRetryAttempts, int upperBoundary, int lowerBoundary, long multiplicationFactor, int timeout, int incrementTimeout) {
this.maxRetryAttempts = maxRetryAttempts;
this.upperBoundary = upperBoundary;
this.lowerBoundary = lowerBoundary;
this.multiplicationFactor = multiplicationFactor;
this.timeout = timeout;
this.incrementTimeout = incrementTimeout;
}
But guice throw me errors saying
No implementation for com.proxy.handlers.RetryServiceCaller$Factory was bound

Guice can automatically provide a zero-argument factory: Instead of injecting Foo, you can always inject Provider<Foo>. This allows you to call fooProvider.get() to create an instance whenever and wherever you'd like. You don't have to bind to a Provider or use a Provides method to get access to this; you can inject Foo or Provider<Foo> whether you use a bind(...).to(...) type binding, a toProvider binding, a toInstance binding, a #Provides method, or anything else, and Guice will call get or return an internal Provider automatically.
(The returned Provider will also respect scopes, so you'll need to drop your #Singleton scope in order to get more than one instance, and be aware that toInstance bindings will always return the same instance.)
This is not a job for FactoryModuleBuilder; only use FactoryModuleBuilder when you need to mix injected and non-injected constructor parameters in the same type.
Your finished binding should look like this:
#Provides
/* NOT #Singleton */
RetryServiceCaller provideMaxRetryAttempts(#Named("config") JsonObject config) throws IOException {
JsonObject retryDetails = config.getJsonObject("retry_details");
return new RetryServiceCaller(retryDetails.getInteger("maxRetryAttempts"), retryDetails.getInteger("upperBoundary"), retryDetails.getInteger("lowerBoundary"),
retryDetails.getLong("multiplicationFactor"), retryDetails.getInteger("timeout"), retryDetails.getInteger("increaseTimeout"));
}
And in your class:
#Inject public YourCallerConsumer(Provider<RetryServiceCaller> callerProvider) {
this.callerProvider = callerProvider;
}
public void doAction() {
RetryServiceCaller newCaller = callerProvider.get();
// interact with caller
}

Your first approach should work just fine. If you don't want the RetryServiceCaller to be a singleton, remove the #Singleton annotation from the provider method, and a new instance will be created for every injection point.
Assisted inject could work here too, but it's overkill. If you want to go that route:
interface RetryServiceCallerFactory {
RetryServiceCaller create(String configParam1, String configParam2);
}
public class RetryServiceCaller {
#AssistedInject
public RetryServiceCaller(String configParam1, String configParam2) {}
}
then, in your module
install(new FactoryModuleBuilder().build(Factory.class);
and in your injection points
#Inject RetryServiceCallerFactory factory;
RetryServiceCaller create(JsonObject config) {
return factory.create(config.getFirstParam(), config.getSecondParam());
}
You can refer to the documentation for more extensive examples.

How to configure providers with custom parameters?

My class depends on some services which needs to take few parameters and then make network call, currently I am passing those parameters and then creating those services via a factory injected into my class. I need to inject those services as a dependency instead, I know that I can create providers for them but in most of the examples I see that the providers are often bound to the fixed values like serveraddres etc. but I need to give then values during run time.
Below is my example code:
public SomeClass {
private final SomeFactory someFactory;
#Inject
SomeClass(SomeFactory factory) {
someFactory = factory;
}
public Foo getFoo(String fooId) {
FooService fooService = someFactory.getFooService(fooId);
return fooService.getFoo();
}
}
What I need to do is:
public SomeClass {
private final FooService fooService;
#Inject
SomeClass(FooService fooService) {
this.fooService = fooService;
}
public Foo getFoo(String fooId) {
return fooService.getFoo();
}
}
Update 1
Making the use case more clear:
#Provides
#RequestScoped
public SomeService provideSomeService(Dep1 dep1, String code) throws IOException {
return new SomeService.Builder()
.withApplicationName("Foo")
.setCode(code)
.build();
}
Here, code can be null by default and when needed I can give some value in it.
Can I somehow pass arguments to the provider before its created?

If you have a binding for your value (here, code is a String without a binding annotation), then your Update 1 is exactly what the code would look like.
In practice, there are a few differences:
Constants like int and String values are generally annotated with a binding annotation, either #Named or a custom annotation.
If you need to inject a value into an object graph after Guice initialization, but have a deep enough object graph that dependency injection is still a good idea, you can create a child injector. This way you can make a #Named("code") String accessible within one action or object, but not across your entire Guice application.
If your value for code is dynamic enough that it can't be provided through Guice as a key of its own, then you'll have to pass it in using a factory of some sort. For a Builder-based object, I'd say that your SomeFactory implementation is the best that I would come up with in your case.
If you don't need to use a Builder, and can let Guice create the object based on your fields or constructor parameters, you can code-generate a Factory.
Guice can generate a factory for you through FactoryModuleBuilder, in a feature known as "assisted injection".
Google's other tool, AutoFactory, will code-generate a factory implementation that works in both Guice and Dagger. (It's bundled as "Auto", which includes a model object generator called AutoValue that also generates annotation implementations.)
I put a small demonstration of a child injector and assisted injection in my other SO answer here.

The best approach here is to parameterize the module and pass the parameter through to a provider that you create at runtime:
public class MyModule extends AbstractModule {
private final String code;
public MyModule(String code) {
this.code = code;
}
#Override public void configure() {
Provider<Dep1> depProvider = getProvider(Dep1.class);
bind(SomeService.class)
.toProvider(() -> new SomeService.Builder()
.withApplicationName("Foo")
.withDep(depProvider.get())
.setCode(code)
.build())
.in(RequestScoped.class);
}
}

Guice inject based on annotation value

I would like to use goolge/guice inject a value based on a class i provide with the annotation.
AutoConfig annotation
#BindingAnnotation
#Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
#Target({ ElementType.PARAMETER, ElementType.FIELD })
public #interface AutoConfig {
// default null not possible
Class<? extends Provider<? extends ConfigLoader<?>>> provider() default XMLAutoConfigProvider.class;
}
This is my annotation which allows configuring the type of config, that should be used for the annotated fields.
Usecase:
#AutoConfig()
ConfigLoader<?> defaultConfig;
#AutoConfig(provider = JsonConfigProvider)
ConfigLoader<?> jsonConfig;
I want to have two configs, one default/xml one and a json one. They will probably never occur in the same class at the same time. But i don't know when the one or the other is used. I used the approach with a class because they are provided by some dependencies/libs and this annotation will be used for some (plugable) submodules.
MyGuiceModule
public class MyGuiceModule extends AbstractModule {
#Override
protected void configure() {
bind(new TypeLiteral<ConfigLoader<?>>() {})
.annotatedWith(AutoConfig.class)
.toProvider(autoConfig.provider());
}
}
This the critical part, i just cannot imagine how to implement it.
So basically i just want to use the provider class specified in the annotation.
Its not necessary to use the provider class here too. Because autoConfig.provider().newInstance() is basically all i need. (I need to use a setter on the new instance but thats all i want to do at this place)
To sum it up all i really want to do is push the annotation (or its values to the provider) either using the get(AutoConfig autoConfig) or in the constructor.
Currently i only use the constructor to inject the configFile value i want to set on the newly generated config instance.

If you know that #AutoConfig(provider = JsonConfigProvider) ConfigLoader<?> jsonConfig is going to return you exactly the results of jsonConfigProvider.get(), and JsonConfigProvider obviously has a public parameterless constructor for newInstance to work, why wouldn't you just ask for a JsonConfigProvider in the first place?
Fundamentally Guice is just a Map<Key, Provider> with fancy wrapping. The bad news is that this makes variable bindings like "bind Foo<T> for all T" impossible to express concisely, and that includes your "bind #Annotation(T) Foo for all T". The good news is that you still have two options.
Bind each provider separately
Though you can't inspect annotations during provision (or tell Guice to do so for you), Guice will compare annotations using their equals methods if you bind an annotation instance rather than an annotation class (the way you would with Names.named("some-name")). This means that you can bind a ConfigLoader<?> with each expected annotation in a Module. Of course, this also means you'll have to have a list of possible ConfigLoader Providers available at configuration time, but they have to be compile-time constants anyway if you're using them as annotation parameters.
This solution works with constructor injection as well, but for fields you'll need both #Inject and #AutoConfig(...), and AutoConfig will need to keep its #BindingAnnotation meta-annotation.
To do this, you're going to have to write an implementation of your annotation, the way Guice does with NamedImpl. Note that the implementations of equals and hashCode must match the ones Java provides in java.lang.Annotation. Then it's just a matter of (redundantly) binding like this:
for(Class<ConfigLoader<?>> clazz : loaders) {
bind(ConfigLoader.class).annotatedWith(new AutoConfigImpl(clazz))
.toProvider(clazz);
}
The definition of equals is up to you, which means you can (and should) bind #AutoConfig(ConfigEnum.JSON) and keep the Guice bindings in your modules rather than specifying your requested implementation all over your codebase.
Use custom injections
You can also use custom injections to search your injected types for custom annotations like #AutoConfig. At this point, you'd be using Guice as a platform to interpret #AutoConfig instead of #Inject, which means that constructor injection won't work but that you can control your injection based on the injected instance, field name, field annotation, annotation parameters, or any combination thereof. If you choose this style, you can drop #BindingAnnotation from AutoConfig.
Use the example in the wiki article linked above as your template, but at minimum you'll need to:
Use bindListener on Binder or AbstractModule to match types that need this custom injection.
In the TypeListener you bind, search injected types for #AutoConfig-annotated fields, and if they have any matching methods then bind those matching methods to a MembersInjector or InjectionListener. You'll probably want to tease the class literal out of the annotation instance here, and pass in the Field and Class as constructor arguments to the MembersInjector/InjectionListener.
In the MembersInjector or InjectionListener you write, instantiate the provider and set the field to the instance the provider provides.
This is a very powerful feature, which would futher allow you to--for instance--automatically provide the configuration based on which instance you're injecting into or based on the name of the field. However, use it carefully and document it heavily, because it may be counter-intuitive to your coworkers that Guice is providing for an annotation other than #Inject. Also bear in mind that this won't work for constructor injection, so refactoring from field injection to constructor injection will cause Guice to complain that it's missing a required binding to instantiate the class.

I had a similar problem. I wanted to use a custom annotation that receives a enum param to choose the implementation. After a lot of research, debug and testing, I came to the following solution:
//enum to define authentication types
public enum AuthType {
Ldap, Saml
}
//custom annotation to be used in injection
#Target({ ElementType.FIELD, ElementType.PARAMETER, ElementType.METHOD })
#BindingAnnotation
public #interface Auth {
AuthType value();
}
//defintion of authenticator
public interface Authenticator {
public void doSomehting();
}
//Authenticator implementations
public class LdapAuthenticator implements Authenticator {
#Override
public void doSomehting() {
// doing ldap stuff
}
}
public class SamlAuthenticator implements Authenticator {
#Override
public void doSomehting() {
// doing saml stuff
}
}
public class MyModule extends AbstractModule {
// annotate fields to bind to implementations
private #Auth(AuthType.Ldap) Authenticator ldap;
private #Auth(AuthType.Saml) Authenticator saml;
#Override
protected void configure() {
//bind the implementation to the annotation from field
bindAnnotated("ldap", LdapAuthenticator.class);
bindAnnotated("saml", SamlAuthenticator.class);
}
private void bindAnnotated(String fieldName, Class<? extends Authenticator> implementation) {
try {
//get the annotation from fields, then bind it to implementation
Annotation ann = MyModule.class.getDeclaredField(fieldName).getAnnotation(Auth.class);
bind(Authenticator.class).annotatedWith(ann).to(implementation);
} catch (NoSuchFieldException | SecurityException e) {
throw new RuntimeException(e);
}
}
}
//usage: add #Auth(<AuthType>) to the dependency
public class ClientClass {
private Authenticator authenticator;
#Inject
public ClientClass(#Auth(AuthType.Ldap) Authenticator authenticator) {
this.authenticator = authenticator;
}
}
Check the documentation of Binder
I tested the Jeff Bowman solution, but it apparently works only binding to providers

As a BindingAnnotations#binding-annotations-with-attributes states equals() and hashCode() should be properly implemented. So given that there is MyAnnotation
#Qualifier
#Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
#Target({ElementType.FIELD, ElementType.PARAMETER})
public #interface MyAnnotation {
SomeEnum value() default SomeEnum.A;
}
which is used to specify SomeInterface implementation(SomeDefault and SomeOther), SomeModule class could look like
public class SomeModule extends AbstractModule {
#Override
protected void configure() {
bind(Key.get(SomeInterface.class, createAnnotationClass(A))).to(SomeDefault.class);
// more common binding expresion
bind(SomeInterface.class).annotatedWith(createAnnotationClass(B)).to(SomeDefault.class);
}
private Annotation createAnnotationClass(SomeEnum someEnum) {
return new MyAnnotation() {
#Override
public SomeEnum value() {
return someEnum;
}
#Override
public Class<? extends Annotation> annotationType() {
return MyAnnotation.class;
}
#Override
public boolean equals(Object o) {
if (this == o) return true;
if (o == null || getClass() != o.getClass()) return false;
MyAnnotationCl myAnnoCl = (MyAnnotationCl) o;
return A == myAnnoCl.getValue();
}
#Override
public int hashCode() {
// from java annotation documentation
return (127 * "value".hashCode()) ^ value().hashCode();
}
};
}
}
Then annotation could be used as follows:
public class DoSomethingWithSomething {
private final SomeInterface someImplementation;
#Inject
public DoSomethingWithSomething(
#MyAnnotation SomeInterface someDefault
// #MyAnnotation(A) SomeInterface someDefault
// #MyAnnotation(B) SomeInterface someOther
) {
this.someImplementation = someDefault;
}
}

Multiple implementations to a service using Guice using providers

I need a suggestion for how to code for multiple implementations for a service using Google-guice. Below is the example
TestService testService =new TestServiceImplOne();
TestService testService =new TestServiceImplTwo();
As Guice doesn't allow binding a type to more than one implementations as the below code results in error
binderObject.bind(SomeType.class).to(ImplemenationOne.class);
binderObject.bind(SomeType.class).to(ImplemenationTwo.class);
we can solve this with named annotations as below
binder.bind(Player.class).annotatedWith(Names.named("Good")).to(GoodPlayer.class);
binder.bind(Player.class).annotatedWith(Names.named("Bad")).to(BadPlayer.class);
#Named("Good") Player goodPlayer = (Player)injector.getInstance(Player.class);
#Named("Bad") Player badPlayer = (Player)injector.getInstance(Player.class);
But the application which iam working is something like this. We are binding all the modules in the init() method and creating the injector modules:
//separate method to bind
protected void configure() {
bind(new TypeLiteral<List<Service>>() {}).toInstance(serviceSets);
}
//separate method to inject
Injector i = Guice.createInjector(modules);
But with the above process I can just bind one implementation class to the interface (service class)
Could you please provide me a way to do this with providers. I would like to do something like this below
class TestServiceProvider extends Provider{
// some code where it returns the instance of impl class needed. In my case TestServiceImplOne and TestServiceImplTwo and provider returns the corresponding instance of service class
}
and bind service class with provider class. Something like this
bind(TestService.class).toProvider(TestServiceProvider.class);
I would appreciate if someone suggests a good example using providers or some other way that I can inject whatever implementation I want in the client.
Note: I am using webservices and I am not sure how I can inject different implementations when a webservice is called to a service class.
First of all thanks very much for responding . Coming straight to the point
Iam working on webservices . Heres's the Flow
// GET URI
GET http://www.google.com:8182/indi/provide/organizations/{ou}
OrganizationsResource -------->OrganizationService------>OrganizationServiceImpl
Iam binding OrganizationService with OrganizationServiceImpl and injecting the OrganizationService in OrganizationsResource
#Inject
public void setOrganizationService(OrganizationService orgService) {
this.orgService= orgService;
}
Its fine till here but i have two implementations for OrganizationService ------>OrgDeatilsServiceImpl which does some other job
Now i want to bind both OrganizationServiceImpl and OrgDeatilsServiceImpl to OrganizationService
Confusions:
1) What procedure i have to use in Guice to bind two implementaions?
2) How exactly i can code in OrganizationsResource to dynamically decide which implementation to call.
I would appreciate if you give a sample example for the above requirement.

As Vladimir noted, you can use binding annotations with Providers...
// in YourModule.configure():
bind(TestService.class)
.annotatedWith(Names.named("foo")
.toProvider(TestServiceProvider.class);
...and generic types using TypeLiterals...
bind(new TypeLiteral<List<Service>>() {})
.annotatedWith(Names.named("bar")
.toInstance(serviceSets);
...as long as you ask for an annotated instance using getInstance(Key<T>)...
List<Service> servicesOne = injector.getInstance(
new Key<List<Service>>(Names.named("bar")) {});
// or
List<Service> servicesTwo = injector.getInstance(
Key.get(new TypeLiteral<List<Service>>() {}, Names.named("bar"));
...or, preferably, keep them as fields and let Guice do the injecting, because Guice can't inject local variables. Remember that Guice can only inject classes that it creates, or that you request specifically.
class MyInjectorCreator {
#Inject #Named("foo") Provider<TestService> fooServiceProvider;
#Inject #Named("bar") List<Service> barServices;
// Guice will also wrap/unwrap Providers automatically.
#Inject #Named("foo") TestService fooService;
#Inject #Named("bar") Provider<List<Service>> barServicesProvider;
public void createInjector() {
Injector injector = Guice.createInjector(getListOfModules());
injector.injectMembers(this);
}
}
Now, that answers the question as you phrased it in the title. That said, it sounds like you actually want to choose between implementations at runtime, which is a slightly different but easy-to-solve problem:
class TestServiceProvider extends Provider<TestService> {
// Injection is allowed here!
#Inject ApplicationSettings settings;
#Inject Provider<TestServiceImplOne> oneProvider;
#Inject Provider<TestServiceImplTwo> twoProvider;
#Override public TestService get() {
if (settings.isInTestMode()) {
return new TestTestServiceImplImpl(); // without injection!
} else if (settings.useNewService()) {
return twoProvider.get(); // with injection!
} else {
return oneProvider.get(); // also with injection!
}
}
}
But I should warn you that if you know at injector creation time which service to use, you should probably just bind it correctly then for the sake of code cleanliness and ease of readability:
// in YourModule.configure():
if (settings.isInTestMode()) {
bind(TestService.class).toInstance(new TestTestServiceImplImpl());
} else if (settings.useNewService()) {
bind(TestService.class).to(TestServiceImplTwo.class);
} else {
bind(TestService.class).to(TestServiceImplOne.class);
}

Hibernate Validator: Intercept Invalid Values

I'd like to set up my beans to use both Hibernate Validator (for validation) and Google Guice (for DI and method interception).
Ideally, I'd like to have a setup where any method that "fails" validation will cause a method interceptor to be called:
public class Widget {
#NotNull
public Fizz getFizz() {
return fizz;
}
}
public class FailedWidgetInterceptor implements MethodInterceptor {
public Object invoke(MethodInvocation invocation) throws Throwable {
// This gets executed if Widget's getFizz() returns null...
}
}
But it looks like Hibernate Validator only allows you to determine pass/fail status by explicitly passing an object T to a ClassValidator<T>'s getInvalidValues() method.
So I need a place to make such a call! The only viable solution I can think of is to create my own annotation (which I've never done before!) which might look like this:
#NotNull
public #interface AutoValidatingNotNull {
// ...??
}
And then in Guice Module:
public class WidgetModule implements Module {
public void configure(Binder binder) {
binder.bindInterceptor(
any(),
annotatedWith(AutoValidatingNotNull.class),
new ValidatingWidgetInterceptor()
);
}
}
public class ValidatingWidgetInterceptor implements MethodInterceptor {
public Object invoke(MethodInvocation invocation) throws Throwable {
ClassValidator<Widget> widgetValidator = new ClassValidator<Widget>();
InvalidValue[] badVals = widgetValidator.getInvalidValues(widget);
if(badVals.length > 0)
handleFailedValidationAndThrowRuntimeExceptionOrSomething();
}
}
Finally, to change getFizz():
#AutoValidatingNotNull
public Fizz getFizz() {
return fizz;
}
For one, this only almost works: inside the interceptor's invoke method, how do I get my hands on the widget instance (the one we wish to validate)?. Is there a way to pass the widget instance via annotations?
Edit:
Doesn't look like I can pass Object into annotations (as parameters)...
Second, this is kind of nasty. Perhaps I'm overlooking something that Hibernate Validator offers that takes care of all this for me? Is there a better way to go? Thanks in advance!

It seems like you're still using the Hibernate Validator 3.x API around ClassValidator et al.
I recommend to upgrade to 4.2 where an API for method validation was introduced which exactly does what you describe.
An example for the required glue code to integrate that API with Google Guice can be found in this project which I created a while ago on GitHub.