Container dependency

[pionl]

Hi @JustSteveKing ,

This is what I was looking for, but have few questions about the possibility to make it more "framework" agnostic and more type strict.

1. I see you are using phpfox/container - would it be possible to remove the depedency and use symfony interface? This way we could pass Laravel / Symfony container.

2. Also I see that you are binding $resource to container, it would be better to use make and provide the SDK as a paremeter to the "resolver". This would allow me to use my own services in constructor.

3. Instead of dynamic calls enfore more strict way how to add resources. -> I must implement method that would return the "resource" -> this would allow IDE to tell the user -> hey I've got these resources you can use (+ PHP Stan checks, etc)

What do you think?

Thanks

[JustSteveKing]

Hey @pionl

So I agree with all of those ideas!!

The phpfox/container was something I created specifically for this package! But I understand your points. I think a Container interface would work better here?

I'd happily accept a PR or example on how you think some of this could work if you are interested?

[pionl]

So I thought about the code and the direction. I would like to know, what is your direction.

As I understand it, your goal was to make non-generic way how a quick way to wrap the endpoints but leave it on the user to correctly find out how to build the "queries" on the sdk.

What I'm looking for is more strict way how to build an SDK, that would allow me to define exactly what are the inputs and what is the resource (can be generic but would be g8 to allow transformers to specified object).

Is this what you want?

For the container I would have ways how to improve it:

• at this moment you are requiring name in resource. This can cause problems because it should be unique but when sharing container there can be conflict. Easy option is to not require name, but just pass class name to container - it is unique
• we have to update phpfox/container dependency to v ^0.3.0 to allow usage in Laravel 9

[JustSteveKing]

So the main thing with the name is to allow calling the resource using __call() method, which is why we need a name, it feels more natural.

But I have been looking at ways to improve the developer experience of this, perhaps something like:

$resource = SDK::make(Resource::class);

$response = $resource->get('/')->where('status', 'active')->send();

[pionl]

Looks nicer. Maybe $sdk->make(...) or use __invoke $sdk(Resource::class) ?

Still not decided what i prefer, sorry for that ;)

[pionl]

I hope I did not take to much of your time. I've decided to go with different aproach. If interested I can share the code when I'm done.

To fix the container issue I added "abstraction" around diff "containers". Something like this.

class LaravelContainerFactory implements SDKContainerFactoryContract
{
    private Container $container;

    public function __construct(Container $container)
    {
        $this->container = $container;
    }

    public function makeEndpoint(AbstractApi $api, string $endpointClass): AbstractEndpoint
    {
        return $this->container->make($endpointClass, ['api' => $api]);
    }
}

[JustSteveKing]

I like the sound of this, it makes it a lot more flexible 😄

[pionl]

I've found that that container interface does not allow make with given 'sdk'. So unfortunately it is not possible.