My basic aim is to extend the package class and override a method in it.
I have used Fnatte's ans as a reference : How to extend laravel 4 core?
Sentry2 is a package that i am using for authentication in larval 4.
A user can be logged in using Sentry::login($credentials)
I want to override the login method of the Sentry package and remove the check for activating the user(i have commented it in the code below)
public function login(UserInterface $user, $remember = false)
{
#prevent throwing error if not activated !
// if ( ! $user->isActivated())
// {
// $login = $user->getLogin();
// throw new UserNotActivatedException("Cannot login user [$login] as they are not activated.");
// }
$this->user = $user;
// Create an array of data to persist to the session and / or cookie
$toPersist = array($user->getId(), $user->getPersistCode());
// Set sessions
$this->session->put($toPersist);
if ($remember)
{
$this->cookie->forever($toPersist);
}
// The user model can attach any handlers
// to the "recordLogin" event.
$user->recordLogin();
}
Steps i have done till now :
1. Created a app/lib folder and added my extension class CustomSentry in it.
2. Added the app/lib folder to composer.json class map
app/lib/CustomSentry.php :
use Cartalyst\Sentry\Sentry;
use Cartalyst\Sentry\Users\UserInterface;
class CustomSentry extends Sentry{
public function login(UserInterface $user, $remember = false){
$this->user = $user;
// Create an array of data to persist to the session and / or cookie
$toPersist = array($user->getId(), $user->getPersistCode());
// Set sessions
$this->session->put($toPersist);
if ($remember)
{
$this->cookie->forever($toPersist);
}
// The user model can attach any handlers
// to the "recordLogin" event.
$user->recordLogin();
}
}
4. Created a service provider app/lib/CustomSentryServiceProvider
use Cartalyst\Sentry\SentryServiceProvider
class CustomSentryServiceProvider extends SentryServiceProvider{
//What should i put it here?
}
5. Register the service provider in app/config/app.php
'CustomSentryServiceProvider'
6. Use it as :
Sentry::login($credentials);
Well i figured out the answer to the question.
The better way to extend the class would be to use the same name. Since i am already using namespacing it would help reduce the confusion.
Assuming my apps name is MyApp i will only need to replace:
Cartalyst\Sentry
by:
MyApp\Cartalyst\Sentry
the rest of the SentryService provider can be copied as it is.
Then i can call the login method the normal way
Sentry::login($credentials)
I have doubts, because you have to copy whole package/Sentry. Did you tried to extend the Sentry class? This this the best way to do what you want to achieve.
Related
The problem
The default namespace for view components is App\View\Components with the folder being app/View/Components. I am setting up a DDD file structure and wish to do two things:
Move "shared" view components to a namespace and folder of App\ViewComponents and src/app/ViewComponents respectively
Have view components specific to individual "apps" with their own namespace and folder of App\MyApplication\ViewComponents and /src/app/MyApplication/ViewComponets respectively.
The new App namespace/folder setup is done via composer psr-4 autoload keys and works fine. But Laravel always used the App\View\Components namespace when trying to load components.
My attempt
I have solved the first part of my problem, but I am hoping that there is a better way. For instance when I want to move views, I can just set the view.paths config directive in my AppServiceProvider but I don't see a similar way of, essentially, adding namespaces to where Laravel looks for view components. So what I ended up doing was:
Create a ViewServiceProvider class, extending Illuminate\View\ViewServiceProvider::class and point to it in bootstrap/app.php instead
In there, override the registerBladeEngine method, in there pointing towards my own BladeCompiler class instead of the built-in one
public function registerBladeEngine($resolver)
{
// The Compiler engine requires an instance of the CompilerInterface, which in
// this case will be the Blade compiler, so we'll first create the compiler
// instance to pass into the engine so it can compile the views properly.
$this->app->singleton('blade.compiler', function () {
return new BladeCompiler(
$this->app['files'],
$this->app['config']['view.compiled'],
);
});
$resolver->register('blade', function () {
return new CompilerEngine(
$this->app['blade.compiler']
);
});
}
In my own BladeCompiler class, which extends Illuminate\View\Compilers\BladeCompiler, override the component() and compileComponentTags() methods - basically anywhere that referenced View\\Components - with pretty much a carbon copy but instead using ViewComponents and also made sure that where they return a Illuminate\View\Compilers\ComponentTagCompiler I instead referenced my own ComponentTagCompiler
In my own TagCompiler I override the guessClassName() method, again with essentially a carbon copy, just renaming View\\Components to ViewComponents
As you can see, that's quite a lot of work just to change the path. And I also want to add another path. Multiple "apps" run under the same Laravel codebase, so for instance we might have App\Website\, App\Admin and App\Blog and, depending on which app is currently running, load a different namespace for the running app, i.e. the blog would be App\Blog\ViewComponents pointing to src/app/Blog/ViewComponents.
Is there a way to achieve this without as much overriding as above? If not, can you suggest a way to achieve the second part of the requirement?
Note: I haven't ruled out using sub folders and continuing with everything under the main App\View\Components namespace just yet - I don't want to fight Laravel more than I have to and am willing to concede if there's no better way, but if I can achieve the folder structure I want it would feel a lot tidier.
Update; got a working implementation by using a configuration and php 8 annotations
Follow the steps below to make it possible to add more lookup folders for the blade view components feature, based on your question and details you have provided. It would have helped to have posted that code you already had. But I have added a possible solution to get it to work, using Annotations and using a config with a namespace/path map.
Depending on how you switch between one application and the other, from which the details are not provided in your question, you have to modify the way the configuration is retreived in the MyComponentTagCompiler class.
Blade compiler
In order to change the ComponentTagCompiler we need to change the BladeCompiler class:
namespace App;
class YourBladeCompiler extends \Illuminate\View\Compilers\BladeCompiler
{
protected function compileComponentTags($value)
{
if (! $this->compilesComponentTags) {
return $value;
}
return (new \App\MyComponentTagCompiler( //it is about this line
$this->classComponentAliases, $this->classComponentNamespaces, $this
))->compile($value);
}
}
Service provider
Now register the YourBladeCompiler in YourViewServiceProvider :
class YourViewServiceProvider extends \Illuminate\View\ViewServiceProvider
{
public function registerBladeEngine($resolver)
{
$this->app->singleton('blade.compiler', function () {
return new \App\YourBladeCompiler( //it is about this line
$this->app['files'],
$this->app['config']['view.compiled'],
);
});
$resolver->register('blade', function () {
return new CompilerEngine(
$this->app['blade.compiler']
);
});
}
}
MyComponentTagCompiler
This is an implemention I created that works with PHP 8 Attributes, given below:
namespace App;
#[\Attribute]
class ViewComponentName
{
public string $name;
public string $package;
public function __construct(string $name, string $package)
{
$this->name = $name;
$this->package = $package;
}
}
With this attribute, you can declare the package name and component name on the view component class (see example at the bottom). So during lookup the component can be matched on these parameters.
But you can change it to your own requirements if needed.
What it does:
It first let's Laravel lookup the View Component through it's own mechanisms, in the parent::componentClass method.
If no component is found and an exception (InvalidArgumentException) is thrown, after which my implementation will walk through the given paths and namespaces (from the getLookupPaths method) and see if an attribute matches the component name and package name. If so it returns this class and the view component is loaded accordingly.
namespace App;
use App\View\ViewComponentName;
use Illuminate\View\Compilers\ComponentTagCompiler;
class MyComponentTagCompiler extends ComponentTagCompiler
{
protected function getLookupPaths() : array
{
/*
* add some logic here to get an application specific configuration
* since you have multiple application in one, I cannot know it works in your
* application, since the details are not provided in the question
*/
return config('view_component_paths');
}
private function getFiles(string $dir) : array
{
return scandir($dir);
}
private function isPhpFile(string $file) : bool
{
return strpos($file, ".php");
}
private function getClassNamespace(string $file, string $folderNamespace) : string
{
$class = str_replace(".php", "", $file);
$classNamespace = $folderNamespace . "\\" . $class;
return $classNamespace;
}
private function getComponentName(string $file, string $namespace) : ?ViewComponentName
{
$classNamespace = $this->getClassNamespace($file, $namespace);
$reflection = new \ReflectionClass($classNamespace);
if(method_exists($reflection, 'getAttributes')) {
$attribute = $reflection->getAttributes()[0];
if ($attribute->getName() == ViewComponentName::class) {
return $attribute->newInstance();
}
}
return null;
}
public function componentClass(string $component)
{
try {
parent::componentClass($component);
} catch(\InvalidArgumentException $e) {
list($lookupComponentPackage, $lookupComponentName) = explode("-", $component);
foreach($this->getLookupPaths() as $namespace=>$dir) {
foreach ($this->getFiles($dir) as $file) {
if ($this->isPhpFile($file)) {
if($componentName = $this->getComponentName($file, $namespace)) {
if($componentName->name == $lookupComponentName && $componentName->package == $lookupComponentPackage) {
return $this->getClassNamespace($file, $namespace);
}
}
}
}
}
throw $e;
}
}
}
Where the config contains (config/view_component_paths.php):
return [
"App\\Test"=>__DIR__ . "/Test/"
];
If you wish to replace the default laravel behavior completely or do not like my implementation based on annotations, consider implementing your own version of the method:
public function componentClass(string $component)
{
//return the class name here based the component name
//without calling parent
dd($component);
}
Example view component
namespace App\Test;
use App\View\ViewComponentName;
use Illuminate\View\Component;
#[ViewComponentName('test', 'namespace')]
class MyViewComponent extends Component
{
public function render()
{
return view('components.test');
}
}
In blade:
<x-namespace-test />
It should now be working. I think this is enough information to give you an idea of how to implement this in your own application. There seems to be no other way than to extend some base classes. But looking at this answer, it is possible to create a high level implementation based on a global lookup configuration and php annotations (or some other mechanism you wish, for example converting the class name with namespace to a view component name).
Old answer
Problem 2 as defined in your question
Have view components specific to individual "apps" with their own namespace and folder of App\MyApplication\ViewComponents and /src/app/MyApplication/ViewComponets respectively.
Sadly there seems to be no way of defining multiple class paths for view components in Laravel. But you can however change the application path and namespace prefix. As far as I found out you only have to overwrite the following properties in the Application class.
bootstrap/app.php
Replace the following lines:
$app = new Illuminate\Foundation\Application(
$_ENV['APP_BASE_PATH'] ?? dirname(__DIR__)
);
With:
class YourApplication extends \Illuminate\Foundation\Application
{
protected $namespace = "App\\MyApplication";
protected $appPath = __DIR__ . "/../app/MyApplication";
}
$app = new YourApplication(
$_ENV['APP_BASE_PATH'] ?? dirname(__DIR__)
);
This is enough to change the app folder to another and gives you an idea of how to change it dynamically for having multiple apps in different namespaces. If you now run laravel commands like php artisan make:component Test1234 it is created in your new app folder: app/MyApplication/View/Components/Test1234.php.
Hardcoded paths
Some paths like View/Components are hardcoded in Laravel, and therefor not that easy to change. If you change as defined above, in this case the view components namespace becomes: App\MyApplication\View\Components and the path: app/MyApplication/View/Components.
Problem 1 as defined in your question
Move "shared" view components to a namespace and folder of App\ViewComponents and src/app/ViewComponents respectively
When you change application paths as explained above it is not possible to have a "shared" View Component folder. Laravel, as it seems, has only one default View Components path, which is based on hard coded paths and a dynamic namespace prefix as explained above. But you can of course, create a shared namespace and register the view components manually:
View component (app/ViewComponents/ folder)
namespace App\ViewComponents;
use Illuminate\View\Component;
class Test extends Component
{
public function render()
{
return view('components.test');
}
}
Don't forget the components.test blade view.
ServiceProvider
\Blade::component("shared-test",\App\ViewComponents\Test::class);
Blade
<x-shared-test />
I'm using Instagram API library to connect user to Instagram profile and then do smth with it. So, as Instagram API wiki says:
Once you have initialized the InstagramAPI class, you must login to an account.
$ig = new \InstagramAPI\Instagram();
$ig->login($username, $password); // Will resume if a previous session exists.
I have initialized InstagramAPI class and then I called $ig->login('username', 'password');. But I have to call it in every function where I need to work with Instagram.
So how could I save this object $ig for using it in the future in other controllers without calling login() any more? Can I save $ig object into the session or cookie file?
P.S. I think saving into the session is not safe way to solve the issue.
UPD: I was trying to save $ig object into the session, however the size is large and session become stop working as well.
Regarding the register method you asked in the comments section, all you need to create a new service provider class in your app\providers directory and declare the register method in there for example:
namespace App\Providers;
use InstagramAPI\Instagram;
use Illuminate\Support\ServiceProvider;
class InstagramServiceProvider extends ServiceProvider
{
public function register()
{
// Use singleton because, always you need the same instance
$this->app->singleton(Instagram::class, function ($app) {
return new Instagram();
});
}
}
Then, add your newly created InstagramServiceProvider class in providers array inside the config/app.php file for example:
'providers' => [
// Other ...
App\Providers\InstagramServiceProvider::class,
]
Now on, in any controller class, whenever you need the Instagram instance, all you need to call the App::make('InstagramAPI\Instagram') or simply call the global function app('InstagramAPI\Instagram') or even you can typehint the class in any method/constructor etc. Some examples:
$ig = App::make('InstagramAPI\Instagram');
$ig = App::make(Instagram::class); // if has use statement at the top fo the class
$ig = app('...');
In a class method as a dependency:
public function someMethod(Instagram $ig)
{
// You can use $ig here
}
Hope this helps but read the documentation properly, there will get everything documented.
I am trying to do a hello world service provider with the new Laravel 5.4.
I have created the following service provider file:
//File: app/TestProvider/TestServiceProvider.php
namespace App\TestProvider;
use Illuminate\Support\ServiceProvider;
class TestServiceProvider extends ServiceProvider
{
/**
* Register bindings in the container.
*
* #return void
*/
public function register()
{
$this->app->bind('Test', function ($app) {
return new Test();
});
}
}
I have created a simple class under the same namespace:
//File: app/TestProvider/Test.php
namespace App\TestProvider;
class Test
{
/**
* Register bindings in the container.
*
* #return void
*/
public function helloWorld()
{
echo "hello world";
}
}
The problem is, this is not registering. The register method is executing as when I put a breaker before the 'bind' method, it executes:
public function register()
{
dd("BREAKER");
$this->app->bind('Test', function ($app) {
return new Test();
});
}
So this outputs "BREAKER" as expected. However if I put the breaker in the closure, nothing happens which suggests for some reason, that 'bind' method isn't being executed??
Any ideas?
EDIT:
Just some further info: I know that the Test class is registered and in the correct namespace as I can do:
dd(new Test());
in the registration method, and it outputs the resource id as expected.
Explanation
The closure provided only runs when the binding is being resolved. That's why it's a closure, it can be saved in the service container and resolved at any time while the program runs.
Solution
To see the resolved binding, create a controller and resolve the class in that controller:
// File: app/Http/Controllers/TestController.php
namespace App\Http\Controllers;
// This isn't the best way, but it works. See the best way below
class TestController extends Controller {
public function index()
{
return \App::make('Test')->helloWorld();
}
}
Of course, don't forget to register the route:
// File: routes/web.php
Route::get('/', 'TestController#index');
The binding will resolve when you hit the homepage.
However, as I said, it's not the best way, so here I prepared a better way. Change the way you register the binding:
// File: app/Providers/TestProvider.php
namespace App\TestProvider;
use Illuminate\Support\ServiceProvider;
use App\TestProvider\Test;
// Better way
class TestServiceProvider extends ServiceProvider
{
/**
* Register bindings in the container.
*
* #return void
*/
public function register()
{
// Note: we bind the exact complete class name!
$this->app->bind(Test::class, function ($app) {
return new Test();
});
}
}
After this change the controller so that it looks like this:
namespace App\Http\Controllers;
use App\TestProvider\Test;
class TestController extends Controller {
/**
* #var Test $test
*/
private $test;
// Let Laravel resolve the dependency on constructing the class
public function __construct(Test $test)
{
$this->test = $test;
}
public function index()
{
return $this->test->helloWorld();
}
}
You will see that the exact same thing happens, but it looks more elegant and avoids conflicts.
Details
Laravel gives only a high level overview of the service container, which doesn't help to learn how it works on the inside. The best way to see that is to go down the call stack.
When you do that, you find that Laravel registers every class in the project in the service container. That means that whether you create a service provider or not, the class will be in the container. How exactly?
When you run php artisan optimize, Laravel creates files that have array with all the classes of the project. When you run the app, after registering everything from the service providers, Laravel registers the rest of the classes from that file.
That means that in your case, if you don't specifically register the Test class, it will still be resolvable. Basically, you only need to register classes that need some specific instructions to be resolved.
So how does Laravel resolve the dependencies?
When you run \App::make(Test::class) or inject dependency via type hinting in the constructor (the "better way" from my solution), Laravel looks for that dependency among the bindings.
When it finds the dependency, it resolves either the closure associated to it or the constructor of the class directly.
When it resolves the constructor directly, it looks for type hints among the constructor parameters and recursively resolves all of them until there's nothing else to resolve.
After that it returns the resolved class.
Of course, bear in mind that for Laravel to analyze the contructor of a class, it needs to be resolved via the service container in the first place. You can't just call $test = new Test(); and expect Laravel to do all the magic :)
Conclusion
This is a rather quick overview of Laravel's service container. The best way for you to learn it is, of course, studying the sources for yourself. It's truly elegant and it uses PHP's functionality to the fullest.
I really hope this shed some light on the service container for you and can help you in the future :)
The closure passed to the bind() method is not executed until you actually attempt to resolve the alias you are binding.
So, if you dd('breaker') inside the closure, this won't actually get executed until Test is resolved (whatever your preferred resolution method is):
Service provider:
// bind the closure to the 'Test' alias
public function register()
{
$this->app->bind('Test', function ($app) {
dd("BREAKER");
return new Test();
});
}
Code that resolve Test alias:
// different ways of resolving the alias out of the container.
// any of these will execute the bound closure.
$test = resolve('Test');
$test = app('Test');
$test = app()->make('Test');
$test = \App::make('Test');
try:
$this->app->bind(Test::class, function ($app) {
return new Test();
});
I have two different modules. Now I need to add different authentication mechanism for both modules.
So I added event code first module's Module.php's onBootstrap method
$listener = $serviceManager->get('First\Service\AuthListener');
$listener->setAdapter($serviceManager->get('First\Service\BasicAuthAdapter'));
$eventManager->attach(MvcEvent::EVENT_ROUTE, $listener, 0);
and in second module's Module.php's onBootstrap method
$listener = $serviceManager->get('Second\Service\AuthListener');
$listener->setAdapter($serviceManager->get('Second\Service\AdvAuthAdapter'));
$eventManager->attach(MvcEvent::EVENT_ROUTE, $listener, 0);
Now if I disable one of modules, functionality working fine and request properly authenticated. While enabling both module do some kind of overlapping So even required module properly authenticated, But other module event code also got executed and system give not authenticated error.
I am thinking this due to event handler code in both module.php is executed without take care of requested module url.
I can verify with requested route pattern before authentication, But that is look like a hack instead of good solution.
If better solution exists for handling this issue ?
UPDATE :
My AuthListener Code :
namespace First\Service;
use Zend\Authentication\Adapter\AdapterInterface;
use Zend\Mvc\MvcEvent;
class AuthListener
{
protected $adapter;
public function setAdapter(AdapterInterface $adapter)
{
$this->adapter = $adapter;
}
public function __invoke(MvcEvent $event)
{
$result = $this->adapter->authenticate();
if (!$result->isValid()) {
$response = $event->getResponse();
// Set some response content
$response->setStatusCode(401);
$routeMatch = $event->getRouteMatch();
$routeMatch->setParam('controller', 'First\Controller\Error');
$routeMatch->setParam('action', 'Auth');
}
}
}
There is a good way to make module specific bootstrap - to use SharedManager:
$e->getApplication()->getEventManager()->getSharedManager()
->attach(__NAMESPACE__, 'dispatch', function(MvcEvent $e) {
// This code will be executed for all controllers in current __NAMESPACE__
}, 100);
Here is a good article to understand difference between EventManager and SharedEventManager
There is no additional info about listeners in the question, but I try to guess:
If you use as listener some callable class - it's ok, just replace function() { } by your $listener.
If you use as listener some class, that implements
ListenerAggregateInterface, you should convert listeners to
SharedListenerAggregateInterface and use method attachAggregate
instead of attach
I hope it helps!
I am trying to register a custom task in my controller in Joomla 3.x so I am modifying the constructor (like in 1.5/2.5) with:
<?php
// No direct access to this file
defined('_JEXEC') or die('Restricted access');
class jjemailControllerjjemail extends JControllerLegacy
{
/**
* constructor (registers additional tasks to methods)
* #return void
*/
public function __construct($config = array())
{
parent::__construct($config);
// Register Extra tasks
$this->registerTask('email, 'email');
}
public function email()
{
$this->setRedirect('index.php?option=com_jjemail&view=thanks', $msg);
}
}
Now if I add a var dump in the constructor before the task registering then that is showing but adding a var dump into the email() function is giving nothing. So I guess I'm failing at registering the task somewhere.
The route calling this looking like: JRoute::_('index.php?option=com_jjemail&task=jjemail.email');
Anyone got any ideas as to why I'm failing in such stupid fashion?
As of Joomla 1.5 you don't need to register default tasks' names.
You only register aliases to map them to one of controller's methods:
$this->registerTask('emailAbc, 'email');
$this->registerTask('unpublish, 'publish');
If you cannot stop execution of the app it would suggest you are calling wrong task from your form/link.
Check your form/link whether it contains a proper task like: option=com_jjemail?task=jjemail.email
Joomla will do all job for you, mapping "jjemail.email" to the email method of your controller