Dagger2 Multiscope with subcomponents
First, I will briefly explain the setup of my project. I have 4 scopes in my project:
@Singleton
@ActivityScope
@ScreenScope- For controllers/fragments
@ChildScreenScope- Nested controllers inside Screenscope
My activity, screen, and child screen are subcomponents.
Let's say I have an ErrorHandler class that could be used in a fragment or child fragment. What is the best way to inject/provide this dependency?
Currently, I provide from Screen component, however, I want child screens to have their own instance. If I provide from both screen and child screen components, it won't work because subcomponents inherit from their parent and I get an error for multiple bindings.
android dagger-2 asked Nov 12 '18 at 20:26
Gokhan ArikGokhan Arik
1,43211743
add a comment |
First, I will briefly explain the setup of my project. I have 4 scopes in my project:
@Singleton
@ActivityScope
@ScreenScope- For controllers/fragments
@ChildScreenScope- Nested controllers inside Screenscope
My activity, screen, and child screen are subcomponents.
Let's say I have an ErrorHandler class that could be used in a fragment or child fragment. What is the best way to inject/provide this dependency?
Currently, I provide from Screen component, however, I want child screens to have their own instance. If I provide from both screen and child screen components, it won't work because subcomponents inherit from their parent and I get an error for multiple bindings.
android dagger-2 asked Nov 12 '18 at 20:26
Gokhan ArikGokhan Arik
1,43211743
If the @provides method is not annotated with the screen scope, then resolving instances of the ErrorHandler will always result in a new instance of ErrorHandler in Screen and Childscreen components
– aschattney
Nov 12 '18 at 21:57
add a comment |
First, I will briefly explain the setup of my project. I have 4 scopes in my project:
@Singleton
@ActivityScope
@ScreenScope- For controllers/fragments
@ChildScreenScope- Nested controllers inside Screenscope
My activity, screen, and child screen are subcomponents.
Let's say I have an ErrorHandler class that could be used in a fragment or child fragment. What is the best way to inject/provide this dependency?
Currently, I provide from Screen component, however, I want child screens to have their own instance. If I provide from both screen and child screen components, it won't work because subcomponents inherit from their parent and I get an error for multiple bindings.
android dagger-2 asked Nov 12 '18 at 20:26
Gokhan ArikGokhan Arik
1,43211743
First, I will briefly explain the setup of my project. I have 4 scopes in my project:
@Singleton
@ActivityScope
@ScreenScope- For controllers/fragments
@ChildScreenScope- Nested controllers inside Screenscope
My activity, screen, and child screen are subcomponents.
Let's say I have an ErrorHandler class that could be used in a fragment or child fragment. What is the best way to inject/provide this dependency?
Currently, I provide from Screen component, however, I want child screens to have their own instance. If I provide from both screen and child screen components, it won't work because subcomponents inherit from their parent and I get an error for multiple bindings.
android dagger-2 android dagger-2 asked Nov 12 '18 at 20:26
Gokhan ArikGokhan Arik
1,43211743
asked Nov 12 '18 at 20:26
Gokhan ArikGokhan Arik
1,43211743
asked Nov 12 '18 at 20:26
Gokhan ArikGokhan Arik
1,43211743
asked Nov 12 '18 at 20:26
Gokhan ArikGokhan Arik
1,43211743
asked Nov 12 '18 at 20:26
Gokhan ArikGokhan Arik
1,43211743
1,43211743
If the @provides method is not annotated with the screen scope, then resolving instances of the ErrorHandler will always result in a new instance of ErrorHandler in Screen and Childscreen components
– aschattney
Nov 12 '18 at 21:57
add a comment |
If the @provides method is not annotated with the screen scope, then resolving instances of the ErrorHandler will always result in a new instance of ErrorHandler in Screen and Childscreen components
– aschattney
Nov 12 '18 at 21:57
If the @provides method is not annotated with the screen scope, then resolving instances of the ErrorHandler will always result in a new instance of ErrorHandler in Screen and Childscreen components
– aschattney
Nov 12 '18 at 21:57
If the @provides method is not annotated with the screen scope, then resolving instances of the ErrorHandler will always result in a new instance of ErrorHandler in Screen and Childscreen components
– aschattney
Nov 12 '18 at 21:57
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
When the type alone is insufficient to identify a dependency, you could use @Named. Following your example, this could look like:
@Module
class ScreenModule {
@ScreenScope
@Provides
@Named("screen")
fun provideErrorHandler(): ErrorHandler = ErrorHandler()
}
@Module
class ChildScreenModule {
@ChildScreenScope
@Provides
@Named("child")
fun provideErrorHandler(): ErrorHandler = ErrorHandler()
}
class MyScreen : Fragment() {
@Inject @Named("screen") lateinit var errorHandler: ErrorHandler
...
}
class MyChildScreen : Fragment() {
@Inject @Named("child") lateinit var errorHandler: ErrorHandler
...
}
answered Nov 13 '18 at 23:33
laengerlaenger
515513
Using scopes does have the DoubleCheck cost. I would just use @Named without any scopes. Child screens would get new instance of ErrorHandler for each injection.
– Vairavan
Nov 16 '18 at 12:56
Just to clarify, DoubleCheck is on the factory instance providing the ErrorHandler.
– Vairavan
Nov 16 '18 at 13:32
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53269592%2fdagger2-multiscope-with-subcomponents%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
When the type alone is insufficient to identify a dependency, you could use @Named. Following your example, this could look like:
@Module
class ScreenModule {
@ScreenScope
@Provides
@Named("screen")
fun provideErrorHandler(): ErrorHandler = ErrorHandler()
}
@Module
class ChildScreenModule {
@ChildScreenScope
@Provides
@Named("child")
fun provideErrorHandler(): ErrorHandler = ErrorHandler()
}
class MyScreen : Fragment() {
@Inject @Named("screen") lateinit var errorHandler: ErrorHandler
...
}
class MyChildScreen : Fragment() {
@Inject @Named("child") lateinit var errorHandler: ErrorHandler
...
}
answered Nov 13 '18 at 23:33
laengerlaenger
515513
Using scopes does have the DoubleCheck cost. I would just use @Named without any scopes. Child screens would get new instance of ErrorHandler for each injection.
– Vairavan
Nov 16 '18 at 12:56
Just to clarify, DoubleCheck is on the factory instance providing the ErrorHandler.
– Vairavan
Nov 16 '18 at 13:32
add a comment |
When the type alone is insufficient to identify a dependency, you could use @Named. Following your example, this could look like:
@Module
class ScreenModule {
@ScreenScope
@Provides
@Named("screen")
fun provideErrorHandler(): ErrorHandler = ErrorHandler()
}
@Module
class ChildScreenModule {
@ChildScreenScope
@Provides
@Named("child")
fun provideErrorHandler(): ErrorHandler = ErrorHandler()
}
class MyScreen : Fragment() {
@Inject @Named("screen") lateinit var errorHandler: ErrorHandler
...
}
class MyChildScreen : Fragment() {
@Inject @Named("child") lateinit var errorHandler: ErrorHandler
...
}
answered Nov 13 '18 at 23:33
laengerlaenger
515513
Using scopes does have the DoubleCheck cost. I would just use @Named without any scopes. Child screens would get new instance of ErrorHandler for each injection.
– Vairavan
Nov 16 '18 at 12:56
Just to clarify, DoubleCheck is on the factory instance providing the ErrorHandler.
– Vairavan
Nov 16 '18 at 13:32
add a comment |
When the type alone is insufficient to identify a dependency, you could use @Named. Following your example, this could look like:
@Module
class ScreenModule {
@ScreenScope
@Provides
@Named("screen")
fun provideErrorHandler(): ErrorHandler = ErrorHandler()
}
@Module
class ChildScreenModule {
@ChildScreenScope
@Provides
@Named("child")
fun provideErrorHandler(): ErrorHandler = ErrorHandler()
}
class MyScreen : Fragment() {
@Inject @Named("screen") lateinit var errorHandler: ErrorHandler
...
}
class MyChildScreen : Fragment() {
@Inject @Named("child") lateinit var errorHandler: ErrorHandler
...
}
answered Nov 13 '18 at 23:33
laengerlaenger
515513
When the type alone is insufficient to identify a dependency, you could use @Named. Following your example, this could look like:
@Module
class ScreenModule {
@ScreenScope
@Provides
@Named("screen")
fun provideErrorHandler(): ErrorHandler = ErrorHandler()
}
@Module
class ChildScreenModule {
@ChildScreenScope
@Provides
@Named("child")
fun provideErrorHandler(): ErrorHandler = ErrorHandler()
}
class MyScreen : Fragment() {
@Inject @Named("screen") lateinit var errorHandler: ErrorHandler
...
}
class MyChildScreen : Fragment() {
@Inject @Named("child") lateinit var errorHandler: ErrorHandler
...
}
answered Nov 13 '18 at 23:33
laengerlaenger
515513
answered Nov 13 '18 at 23:33
laengerlaenger
515513
answered Nov 13 '18 at 23:33
laengerlaenger
515513
answered Nov 13 '18 at 23:33
laengerlaenger
515513
515513
Using scopes does have the DoubleCheck cost. I would just use @Named without any scopes. Child screens would get new instance of ErrorHandler for each injection.
– Vairavan
Nov 16 '18 at 12:56
Just to clarify, DoubleCheck is on the factory instance providing the ErrorHandler.
– Vairavan
Nov 16 '18 at 13:32
add a comment |
Using scopes does have the DoubleCheck cost. I would just use @Named without any scopes. Child screens would get new instance of ErrorHandler for each injection.
– Vairavan
Nov 16 '18 at 12:56
Just to clarify, DoubleCheck is on the factory instance providing the ErrorHandler.
– Vairavan
Nov 16 '18 at 13:32
Using scopes does have the DoubleCheck cost. I would just use @Named without any scopes. Child screens would get new instance of ErrorHandler for each injection.
– Vairavan
Nov 16 '18 at 12:56
Using scopes does have the DoubleCheck cost. I would just use @Named without any scopes. Child screens would get new instance of ErrorHandler for each injection.
– Vairavan
Nov 16 '18 at 12:56
Just to clarify, DoubleCheck is on the factory instance providing the ErrorHandler.
– Vairavan
Nov 16 '18 at 13:32
Just to clarify, DoubleCheck is on the factory instance providing the ErrorHandler.
– Vairavan
Nov 16 '18 at 13:32
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53269592%2fdagger2-multiscope-with-subcomponents%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
If the @provides method is not annotated with the screen scope, then resolving instances of the ErrorHandler will always result in a new instance of ErrorHandler in Screen and Childscreen components
– aschattney
Nov 12 '18 at 21:57