BUGFIXES: Processing of preconfigured settings and invokable resolution #242

fhein · 2018-01-28T02:06:42Z

This PR adds tests and fixes for several issues around configuration and resolution of Invokables.

Preconfigured abstract factories are not resolved.
Preconfigured initializers are not resolved.
Preconfigured invokables are not resolved.
Invokables defined as name => InvokableClass can override delegators and factories.

A performance gain more than 100% in FetchNewServiceManagerBench.php is a welcome side effect.

test assets.

requested name 'foo'.

still open here.

aliases and factories. Added test to show that invokables override delegators and delegators. Added a test to show that preconfigured invokables are ignored. Fixed that problems.

fhein · 2018-01-29T17:52:46Z

This is ready for review.

…igured settings are processed. Resolves bug which could cause invokables to overwrite delegators and factories. Removed tests which explicitly tested that invokables were tranformed to aliases and factories (they are now stored in a member array).

fhein · 2018-01-31T19:58:12Z

Heres the benchmark for ServiceManagerCreation. Done with --revs=500 --iterations=50.

$ vendor\bin\phpbench report --file=..\master.FetchNewServiceManager.xml --file=..\PR242.FetchNewServiceManager.xml --report=compare
benchmark: FetchNewServiceManagerBench
+----------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+
| subject                          | suite:master:mean | suite:PR242:mean |
+----------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+
| benchFetchServiceManagerCreation | 878.050µs         | 387.422µs        |
+----------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+

fhein · 2018-01-31T22:52:32Z

Here are the comparison reports for the rest of the benchmarks. Tests which feature the creation of invokables profit from the fix.

$ vendor\bin\phpbench report --file=..\master.all.xml --file=..\PR242.all.xml --report=compare
benchmark: FetchCachedServicesBench
+----------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+
| subject                          | suite:master:mean | suite:PR242:mean |
+----------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+
| benchFetchFactory1               | 0.452µs           | 0.459µs          |
| benchFetchInvokable1             | 0.473µs           | 0.474µs          |
| benchFetchService1               | 0.457µs           | 0.461µs          |
| benchFetchAlias1                 | 0.458µs           | 0.459µs          |
| benchFetchRecursiveAlias1        | 0.474µs           | 0.477µs          |
| benchFetchRecursiveAlias2        | 0.468µs           | 0.473µs          |
| benchFetchAbstractFactoryService | 2.450µs           | 2.529µs          |
+----------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+

benchmark: FetchNewServiceUsingConfigAbstractFactoryAsFactoryBench
+-------------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+
| subject                             | suite:master:mean | suite:PR242:mean |
+-------------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+
| benchFetchServiceWithNoDependencies | 5.042µs           | 4.823µs          |
| benchBuildServiceWithNoDependencies | 4.613µs           | 4.414µs          |
| benchFetchServiceDependingOnConfig  | 5.744µs           | 5.443µs          |
| benchBuildServiceDependingOnConfig  | 5.306µs           | 5.021µs          |
| benchFetchServiceWithDependency     | 5.681µs           | 5.402µs          |
| benchBuildServiceWithDependency     | 5.210µs           | 4.970µs          |
+-------------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+

benchmark: FetchNewServiceUsingReflectionAbstractFactoryAsFactoryBench
+-------------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+
| subject                             | suite:master:mean | suite:PR242:mean |
+-------------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+
| benchFetchServiceWithNoDependencies | 3.963µs           | 3.779µs          |
| benchBuildServiceWithNoDependencies | 3.537µs           | 3.314µs          |
| benchFetchServiceDependingOnConfig  | 7.089µs           | 6.746µs          |
| benchBuildServiceDependingOnConfig  | 6.650µs           | 6.303µs          |
| benchFetchServiceWithDependency     | 8.432µs           | 7.954µs          |
| benchBuildServiceWithDependency     | 7.960µs           | 7.559µs          |
+-------------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+

benchmark: FetchNewServiceViaConfigAbstractFactoryBench
+-------------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+
| subject                             | suite:master:mean | suite:PR242:mean |
+-------------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+
| benchFetchServiceWithNoDependencies | 5.489µs           | 5.228µs          |
| benchBuildServiceWithNoDependencies | 4.922µs           | 4.681µs          |
| benchFetchServiceDependingOnConfig  | 6.143µs           | 6.225µs          |
| benchBuildServiceDependingOnConfig  | 5.601µs           | 5.322µs          |
| benchFetchServiceWithDependency     | 6.122µs           | 5.825µs          |
| benchBuildServiceWithDependency     | 5.564µs           | 5.267µs          |
+-------------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+

benchmark: FetchNewServiceViaReflectionAbstractFactoryBench
+-------------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+
| subject                             | suite:master:mean | suite:PR242:mean |
+-------------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+
| benchFetchServiceWithNoDependencies | 3.434µs           | 3.304µs          |
| benchBuildServiceWithNoDependencies | 2.919µs           | 2.702µs          |
| benchFetchServiceDependingOnConfig  | 6.766µs           | 6.397µs          |
| benchBuildServiceDependingOnConfig  | 6.221µs           | 5.844µs          |
| benchFetchServiceWithDependency     | 8.095µs           | 7.682µs          |
| benchBuildServiceWithDependency     | 7.555µs           | 7.149µs          |
+-------------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+

benchmark: FetchNewServicesBench
+----------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+
| subject                          | suite:master:mean | suite:PR242:mean |
+----------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+
| benchFetchFactory1               | 2.820µs           | 2.839µs          |
| benchBuildFactory1               | 2.395µs           | 2.184µs          |
| benchFetchInvokable1             | 3.315µs           | 2.340µs          |
| benchBuildInvokable1             | 2.620µs           | 1.938µs          |
| benchFetchService1               | 0.455µs           | 0.468µs          |
| benchFetchFactoryAlias1          | 2.454µs           | 2.341µs          |
| benchBuildFactoryAlias1          | 2.461µs           | 2.340µs          |
| benchFetchRecursiveFactoryAlias1 | 2.475µs           | 2.340µs          |
| benchBuildRecursiveFactoryAlias1 | 2.490µs           | 2.341µs          |
| benchFetchRecursiveFactoryAlias2 | 2.497µs           | 2.340µs          |
| benchBuildRecursiveFactoryAlias2 | 2.473µs           | 2.392µs          |
| benchFetchAbstractFactoryFoo     | 2.407µs           | 2.408µs          |
| benchBuildAbstractFactoryFoo     | 1.947µs           | 1.892µs          |
+----------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+

benchmark: HasBench
+-------------------------+-------------------+------------------+
| subject                 | suite:master:mean | suite:PR242:mean |
+-------------------------+-------------------+------------------+
| benchHasFactory1        | 0.526µs           | 0.546µs          |
| benchHasInvokable1      | 0.603µs           | 0.589µs          |
| benchHasService1        | 0.482µs           | 0.511µs          |
| benchHasAlias1          | 0.584µs           | 0.612µs          |
| benchHasRecursiveAlias1 | 0.605µs           | 0.633µs          |
| benchHasRecursiveAlias2 | 0.603µs           | 0.629µs          |
| benchHasAbstractFactory | 0.839µs           | 0.895µs          |
| benchHasNot             | 0.851µs           | 0.911µs          |
+-------------------------+-------------------+------------------+

benchmark: SetNewServicesBench
+------------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+
| subject                            | suite:master:mean | suite:PR242:mean |
+------------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+
| benchSetService                    | 2.027µs           | 2.047µs          |
| benchSetFactory                    | 4.350µs           | 4.285µs          |
| benchSetAlias                      | 11.946µs          | 11.693µs         |
| benchOverrideAlias                 | 36.493µs          | 36.031µs         |
| benchSetInvokableClass             | 5.359µs           | 1.976µs          |
| benchAddDelegator                  | 2.090µs           | 2.109µs          |
| benchAddInitializerByClassName     | 2.473µs           | 2.518µs          |
| benchAddInitializerByInstance      | 1.764µs           | 1.815µs          |
| benchAddAbstractFactoryByClassName | 3.488µs           | 3.544µs          |
| benchAddAbstractFactoryByInstance  | 3.118µs           | 3.116µs          |
+------------------------------------+-------------------+------------------+

weierophinney

Overall, looks sane. My one hesitation is the change to how invokables are handled internally, as it results in test deletions. That said, the public behavior is well-tested, and the behavior changes have good tests.

@Ocramius — thoughts?

(Marking as requiring changes, as a commented-out line needs removal.)

weierophinney · 2018-02-01T16:07:40Z

test/CommonServiceLocatorBehaviorsTrait.php

@@ -640,7 +640,7 @@ public function testCanInjectInvokables()
        $container = $this->createContainer();
        $container->setInvokableClass('foo', stdClass::class);
        $this->assertTrue($container->has('foo'));
-        $this->assertTrue($container->has(stdClass::class));
+//        $this->assertTrue($container->has(stdClass::class));


Please remove the line entirely, instead of commenting it out.

fhein · 2018-02-01T16:21:02Z

The tests deleted checked the particular implementation of invokables (i.e. the transformation to alias and factory). Kind of white box testing. As the implementation changed, these tests got obsolete. To be complete, I could have introduced a white box test verifying that an invokable really gets stored in the invokables array. I believe, that would be overdone a bit.

combination of alias and factory, which has changed.

weierophinney

One more change needed, as indicated, but I'll do that during merge.

Thanks!

weierophinney · 2018-02-01T17:25:43Z

benchmarks/BenchAsset/DelegatorFactoryFoo.php

+     */
+    public function __invoke(ContainerInterface $container, $name, callable $callback, array $options = null)
+    {
+        return $callback($options);


This isn't correct.

$callback() should be called without any arguments; it essentially executes any previous delegators and/or the factory that produces the original service and returns the service.

$options is present for abstract plugin managers, to indicate what $options were provided to build(). Delegators will typically ignore them.

weierophinney · 2018-02-01T17:35:46Z

@fhein I've merged locally. However, this patch is wildly different than what is on develop currently, with regards to invokables, which is making merging there quite difficult.

Should I leave the code on develop as-is, or attempt a merge?

fhein · 2018-02-01T18:12:00Z

Is there a way you could leave the pain up to me? I think, the bug fix is most important. I offer to take care of develop by rebasing if that's possible.

The main difference of this to develop is that alias handling was introduced to develop which is not contained in this PR.

But I will have a closer look on the diffs.

fhein · 2018-02-01T18:25:17Z

Puh. Aliases and setter optimization and minor adjustments.

Would a process like this work?

1, Merge this with master.
2, I'd create a PR based on master applying all differences of current develop.
3, Next? I am not gitalist enough to know. :(

Ocramius · 2018-02-01T18:24:10Z

src/ServiceManager.php

+     *
+     * @var string[]|callable[]
+     */
+    protected $invokables = [];


Since this is a new property, we should use private to avoid introducing even more BC issues.

Ocramius · 2018-02-01T18:24:31Z

benchmarks/SetNewServicesBench.php

        ];

        for ($i = 0; $i <= self::NUM_SERVICES; $i++) {
            $config['factories']["factory_$i"] = BenchAsset\FactoryFoo::class;
            $config['aliases']["alias_$i"]     = "service_$i";
+            $config['abstract_factories'][] = BenchAsset\AbstractFactoryFoo::class;
+            $config['invokables']['invokable_$i'] = BenchAsset\Foo::class;


$i is not being interpolated here

Ocramius · 2018-02-01T18:24:35Z

benchmarks/SetNewServicesBench.php

        ];

        for ($i = 0; $i <= self::NUM_SERVICES; $i++) {
            $config['factories']["factory_$i"] = BenchAsset\FactoryFoo::class;
            $config['aliases']["alias_$i"]     = "service_$i";
+            $config['abstract_factories'][] = BenchAsset\AbstractFactoryFoo::class;
+            $config['invokables']['invokable_$i'] = BenchAsset\Foo::class;
+            $config['delegators']['delegator_$i'] = [ DelegatorFactoryFoo::class ];


$i is not being interpolated here

Ocramius · 2018-02-01T18:25:49Z

src/ServiceManager.php

        $this->configure($config);
+        $this->configured = true;


This should be moved back into configure() to avoid BC issues - calling just the parent constructor may still lead a child class to change the value to false afterwards.

Ocramius · 2018-02-01T18:26:09Z

src/ServiceManager.php

@@ -425,7 +434,7 @@ public function setAlias($alias, $target)
     */
    public function setInvokableClass($name, $class = null)
    {
-        $this->configure(['invokables' => [$name => $class ?: $name]]);
+        $this->configure(['invokables' => [ $name => (isset($class) ? $class : $name)]]);


To be replaced by ??

?? is PHP 7. Am I wrong?

This package has PHP 7.1 as minimum supported PHP version, so you can use all the fancy stuff

This is a PR against master.

Ah, totally missed that =_=

Ocramius · 2018-02-01T18:29:35Z

test/ServiceManagerTest.php

@@ -151,40 +155,6 @@ public function testShareability($sharedByDefault, $serviceShared, $serviceDefin
        $this->assertEquals($shouldBeSameInstance, $a === $b);
    }

-    public function testMapsOneToOneInvokablesAsInvokableFactoriesInternally()


What is the reason for the removal of this test? While it is true that we should always treat the SUT as a black box, this test protected us against BC issues with subclassing (factories property is protected)

The reason for removal is that the implementation does not map invokables to factories at configuration time any more. See my comment above your review.

Ocramius · 2018-02-01T18:30:32Z

test/ServiceManagerTest.php

-        ], 'factories', $serviceManager, 'Invokable object factory not found');
-    }
-
-    public function testMapsNonSymmetricInvokablesAsAliasPlusInvokableFactory()


Same here - while the test was indeed ugly (accessing object state) it exposes the BC boundary around protected $aliases

Same reason.

Ocramius · 2018-02-01T18:31:22Z

test/ServiceManagerTest.php

@@ -283,4 +253,92 @@ public function testFactoryMayBeStaticMethodDescribedByCallableString()
        $serviceManager = new SimpleServiceManager($config);
        $this->assertEquals(stdClass::class, get_class($serviceManager->get(stdClass::class)));
    }
+
+    public function testMemberBasedConfigurationGetsApplied()


Is it possible to split this test into multiple ones? Ideally, the comments you put above each block should be the test method name

On command. :)

Ocramius · 2018-02-01T18:32:10Z

test/ServiceManagerTest.php

+
+        $object1 = $sm->build('factory1');
+        // assert delegated object is produced by delegator factory
+        $this->assertTrue(isset($object1->delegatorTag));


assertPropertyExist should probably be used here

Ocramius · 2018-02-01T18:32:31Z

test/ServiceManagerTest.php

+        $this->assertFalse(isset($object2->delegatorTag));
+        $this->assertInstanceOf(InvokableObject::class, $object2);
+
+        $sm->setInvokableClass('factory1', stdClass::class);


This should raise an exception due to already set service

weierophinney · 2018-02-01T18:41:31Z

Would a process like this work?

1, Merge this with master.
2, I'd create a PR based on master applying all differences of current develop.
3, Next? I am not gitalist enough to know. :(

No, this doesn't work. It creates a merge conflict when we're ready to merge develop back to master in order to prep the next minor release, which means having to resolve it all again anyways. (Learned this the hard way.)

Looks like there are other changes requested, so I'll wait for now.

assertObjectHasProperty/assertObjectNotHasProperty

to configure().

preconfiguration by child class.

reference parameter. getFactory was replaced by createObjectThroughFactory. Adjusted delegator creation accordingly.

…e technique there.

…igured settings are processed. Resolves bug which could cause invokables to overwrite delegators and factories. Removed tests which explicitly tested that invokables were tranformed to aliases and factories (they are now stored in a member array).

…e technique there.

fhein · 2018-02-06T04:48:04Z

Something more I should do?

…zend-servicemanager/master Applied PR zendframework#242 to master

Apply PR zendframework#242 to zend-master

fhein · 2018-02-07T19:17:01Z

I noticed that is quite a lot of work to rebase develop to master after #242 was applied to master.

With PR #251 I provide a branch which represents a rebase of current develop onto (current master with PR #242 applied). This can obviously not get automatically be merged with develop, but it delivers a reference, how develop should look like after integration of PR #242.

I hope this helps. If I can do more, please let me know.

fhein · 2018-02-08T02:02:47Z

This was replaced by #253. Please see documentation there.

fhein added 6 commits January 28, 2018 02:18

Adds test that preconfiguration through members gets applied.

5413057

Adds PreconfiguredServiceManager test asset.

3b5ddd6

Adds TaggingInitializer, AbstractFactoryFoo and PassthroughDelegator

d51cf4b

test assets.

Adds test asset PreconfiguredServiceManager.

860d629

Adds class Foo test asset. To be generated by AbstractFactoryFoo on

ab26a61

requested name 'foo'.

Fake.

1c1f0d6

fhein changed the title ~~Test prefconfiguration gets applied~~ ServiceManager does not respect confugaration supplied by child classes members Jan 28, 2018

fhein added 7 commits January 29, 2018 16:09

Fix: Process preconfigured abstract factories and initializers

f977a4b

Adds test asset TaggingDelegatorFactory.

bcaf2d5

Completes the fix for abstract factories and initializers. Invokables

539cfb4

still open here.

Fixes completed for abstract factories and initializers.

3b8155e

Removed tests which explicitly tested if invokables are converted to

d2650ee

aliases and factories. Added test to show that invokables override delegators and delegators. Added a test to show that preconfigured invokables are ignored. Fixed that problems.

Parens added.

c94e1cf

Change for PHP 5.6 compatibility.

5298ab0

fhein changed the title ~~ServiceManager does not respect confugaration supplied by child classes members~~ BUGFIXES: Processing of preconfigured settings and invokable resolution Jan 29, 2018

Removed $constructing parameter.

5aa73cc

fhein force-pushed the TEST-Prefconfiguration-gets-applied branch from d2b4709 to 5aa73cc Compare January 29, 2018 22:48

Set $this->configured after call to configure() at construction time.

cb3b0b1

Extended benchmarks as of zendframework#231

8b787f2

weierophinney suggested changes Feb 1, 2018

View reviewed changes

Deleted an assert which was assuming that invokables are handled as

13e0feb

combination of alias and factory, which has changed.

weierophinney approved these changes Feb 1, 2018

View reviewed changes

As requested.

0365c4b

Ocramius suggested changes Feb 1, 2018

View reviewed changes

fhein added 7 commits February 1, 2018 20:32

Split PreconfigurationGetsAppliedTest. Changed tag checking

63b2302

assertObjectHasProperty/assertObjectNotHasProperty

Replaced unsets with [] assignments. Moved $configured assignment back

0d36f50

to configure().

As requested.

e568c94

Made $invokables private to avoid bc issues.

a8ba1a3

Had to revert access to $invokables[] to protected in order to allow

8e91bc6

preconfiguration by child class.

Moved object creation through factory one level down to avoid using a

de467bd

reference parameter. getFactory was replaced by createObjectThroughFactory. Adjusted delegator creation accordingly.

Changed docblock.

b27f5d0

fhein added a commit to fhein/zend-servicemanager that referenced this pull request Feb 1, 2018

Issues as requested. Regarding by-ref see zendframework#242 also. Sam…

792e031

…e technique there.

Removed commented old line of previous implementation.

44a7b5b

fhein added a commit to fhein/zend-servicemanager that referenced this pull request Feb 2, 2018

Applied corrections as of PR zendframework#242 to this.

f3f96c1

Removed @Covers getFactory, because that does not exist any longer.

73eadf1

fhein added a commit to fhein/zend-servicemanager that referenced this pull request Feb 2, 2018

Issues as requested. Regarding by-ref see zendframework#242 also. Sam…

29c95b1

…e technique there.

fhein added a commit to fhein/zend-servicemanager that referenced this pull request Feb 2, 2018

Applied corrections as of PR zendframework#242 to this.

f86e395

Renamed createObjectTroughFactory to createServiceThroughFactory

1c58b3a

fhein added a commit to fhein/zend-servicemanager that referenced this pull request Feb 7, 2018

Merge pull request from fhein/TEST-Prefconfiguration-gets-applied to …

d2eb0ae

…zend-servicemanager/master Applied PR zendframework#242 to master

fhein added a commit to fhein/zend-servicemanager that referenced this pull request Feb 7, 2018

Merge pull request #3 from fhein/TEST-Prefconfiguration-gets-applied

e703a00

Apply PR zendframework#242 to zend-master

fhein added a commit to fhein/zend-servicemanager that referenced this pull request Feb 8, 2018

Sync with zendframework#242.

630171b

fhein closed this Feb 8, 2018

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

BUGFIXES: Processing of preconfigured settings and invokable resolution #242

BUGFIXES: Processing of preconfigured settings and invokable resolution #242

fhein commented Jan 28, 2018 •

edited

Loading

fhein commented Jan 29, 2018

fhein commented Jan 31, 2018

fhein commented Jan 31, 2018

weierophinney left a comment

weierophinney Feb 1, 2018

fhein commented Feb 1, 2018 •

edited

Loading

weierophinney left a comment

weierophinney Feb 1, 2018

weierophinney commented Feb 1, 2018

fhein commented Feb 1, 2018

fhein commented Feb 1, 2018

Ocramius Feb 1, 2018

Ocramius Feb 1, 2018

Ocramius Feb 1, 2018

Ocramius Feb 1, 2018

Ocramius Feb 1, 2018

fhein Feb 1, 2018

Ocramius Feb 1, 2018

fhein Feb 1, 2018

Ocramius Feb 1, 2018

Ocramius Feb 1, 2018

fhein Feb 1, 2018

Ocramius Feb 1, 2018

fhein Feb 1, 2018

Ocramius Feb 1, 2018

fhein Feb 1, 2018

Ocramius Feb 1, 2018

Ocramius Feb 1, 2018

weierophinney commented Feb 1, 2018

fhein commented Feb 6, 2018

fhein commented Feb 7, 2018

fhein commented Feb 8, 2018

BUGFIXES: Processing of preconfigured settings and invokable resolution #242

BUGFIXES: Processing of preconfigured settings and invokable resolution #242

Conversation

fhein commented Jan 28, 2018 • edited Loading

fhein commented Jan 29, 2018

fhein commented Jan 31, 2018

fhein commented Jan 31, 2018

weierophinney left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

fhein commented Feb 1, 2018 • edited Loading

weierophinney left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

weierophinney commented Feb 1, 2018

fhein commented Feb 1, 2018

fhein commented Feb 1, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

weierophinney commented Feb 1, 2018

fhein commented Feb 6, 2018

fhein commented Feb 7, 2018

fhein commented Feb 8, 2018

fhein commented Jan 28, 2018 •

edited

Loading

fhein commented Feb 1, 2018 •

edited

Loading