Using Simple Injector with Unit Of Work & Repository Pattern in Windows Form

Question

I\'m trying to implement IoC in my windows form application. My choice fell on Simple Injector, because it\'s fast and lightweight. I also implement unit of work and reposit

Answer 1

The problem you have is the difference in lifestyles between your service, repository, unitofwork and dbcontext.

Because the MemberRepository has a Singleton lifestyle, Simple Injector will create one instance which will be reused for the duration of the application, which could be days, even weeks or months with a WinForms application. The direct consequence from registering the MemberRepository as Singleton is that all dependencies of this class will become Singletons as well, no matter what lifestyle is used in the registration. This is a common problem called Captive Dependency.

As a side note: The diagnostic services of Simple Injector are able to spot this configuration mistake and will show/throw a Potential Lifestyle Mismatch warning.

So the MemberRepository is Singleton and has one and the same DbContext throughout the application lifetime. But the UnitOfWork, which has a dependency also on DbContext will receive a different instance of the DbContext, because the registration for DbContext is Transient. This context will, in your example, never save the newly created Member because this DbContext does not have any newly created Member, the member is created in a different DbContext.

When you change the registration of DbContext to RegisterSingleton it will start working, because now every service, class or whatever depending on DbContext will get the same instance.

But this is certainly not the solution because having one DbContext for the lifetime of the application will get you into trouble, as you probably already know. This is explained in great detail in this post.

The solution you need is using a Scoped instance of the DbContext, which you already tried. You are missing some information on how to use the lifetime scope feature of Simple Injector (and most of the other containers out there). When using a Scoped lifestyle there must be an active scope as the exception message clearly states. Starting a lifetime scope is pretty simple:

using (ThreadScopedLifestyle.BeginScope(container)) 
{
    // all instances resolved within this scope
    // with a ThreadScopedLifestyleLifestyle
    // will be the same instance
}

You can read in detail here.

Changing the registrations to:

var container = new Container();
container.Options.DefaultScopedLifestyle = new ThreadScopedLifestyle();

container.Register<IMemberRepository, MemberRepository>(Lifestyle.Scoped);
container.Register<IMemberService, MemberService>(Lifestyle.Scoped);
container.Register<DbContext, MemberContext>(Lifestyle.Scoped);
container.Register<IUnitOfWork, UnitOfWork>(Lifestyle.Scoped);

and changing the code from btnSaveClick() to:

private void btnSave_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
    Member member = new Member();
    member.Name = txtName.Text;

    using (ThreadScopedLifestyle.BeginScope(container)) 
    {
        var memberService = container.GetInstance<IMemberService>();
        memberService.Save(member);
    }
}

is basically what you need.

But we have now introduced a new problem. We are now using the Service Locator anti pattern to get a Scoped instance of the IMemberService implementation. Therefore we need some infrastructural object which will handle this for us as a Cross-Cutting Concern in the application. A Decorator is a perfect way to implement this. See also here. This will look like:

public class ThreadScopedMemberServiceDecorator : IMemberService
{
    private readonly Func<IMemberService> decorateeFactory;
    private readonly Container container;

    public ThreadScopedMemberServiceDecorator(Func<IMemberService> decorateeFactory,
        Container container)
    {
        this.decorateeFactory = decorateeFactory;
        this.container = container;
    }

    public void Save(List<Member> members)
    {
        using (ThreadScopedLifestyle.BeginScope(container)) 
        {
            IMemberService service = this.decorateeFactory.Invoke();

            service.Save(members);
        }
    }
}

You now register this as a (Singleton) Decorator in the Simple Injector Container like this:

container.RegisterDecorator(
    typeof(IMemberService), 
    typeof(ThreadScopedMemberServiceDecorator),
    Lifestyle.Singleton);

The container will provide a class which depends on IMemberService with this ThreadScopedMemberServiceDecorator. In this the container will inject a Func<IMemberService> which, when invoked, will return an instance from the container using the configured lifestyle.

Adding this Decorator (and its registration) and changing the lifestyles will fix the issue from your example.

I expect however that your application will in the end have an IMemberService, IUserService, ICustomerService, etc... So you need a decorator for each and every IXXXService, not very DRY if you ask me. If all services will implement Save(List<T> items) you could consider creating an open generic interface:

public interface IService<T>
{
    void Save(List<T> items); 
}

public class MemberService : IService<Member>
{
     // same code as before
}

You register all implementations in one line using Batch-Registration:

container.Register(typeof(IService<>),
    new[] { Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly() },
    Lifestyle.Scoped);

And you can wrap all these instances into a single open generic implementation of the above mentioned ThreadScopedServiceDecorator.

It would IMO even be better to use the command / handler pattern (you should really read the link!) for this type of work. In very short: In this pattern every use case is translated to a message object (a command) which is handled by a single command handler, which can be decorated by e.g. a SaveChangesCommandHandlerDecorator and a ThreadScopedCommandHandlerDecorator and LoggingDecorator and so on.

Your example would then look like:

public interface ICommandHandler<TCommand>
{
    void Handle(TCommand command);
}

public class CreateMemberCommand
{
    public string MemberName { get; set; }
}

With the following handlers:

public class CreateMemberCommandHandler : ICommandHandler<CreateMemberCommand>
{
    //notice that the need for MemberRepository is zero IMO
    private readonly IGenericRepository<Member> memberRepository;

    public CreateMemberCommandHandler(IGenericRepository<Member> memberRepository)
    {
        this.memberRepository = memberRepository;
    }

    public void Handle(CreateMemberCommand command)
    {
        var member = new Member { Name = command.MemberName };
        this.memberRepository.Insert(member);
    }
}

public class SaveChangesCommandHandlerDecorator<TCommand>
    : ICommandHandler<TCommand>
{
    private ICommandHandler<TCommand> decoratee;
    private DbContext db;

    public SaveChangesCommandHandlerDecorator(
        ICommandHandler<TCommand> decoratee, DbContext db)
    {
        this.decoratee = decoratee;
        this.db = db;
    }

    public void Handle(TCommand command)
    {
        this.decoratee.Handle(command);
        this.db.SaveChanges();
    }
}

And the form can now depend on ICommandHandler<T>:

public partial class frmMember : Form
{
    private readonly ICommandHandler<CreateMemberCommand> commandHandler;

    public frmMember(ICommandHandler<CreateMemberCommand> commandHandler)
    {
        InitializeComponent();
        this.commandHandler = commandHandler;
    }

    private void btnSave_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
    {
        this.commandHandler.Handle(
            new CreateMemberCommand { MemberName = txtName.Text });
    }
}

This can all be registered as follows:

container.Register(typeof(IGenericRepository<>), 
    typeof(GenericRepository<>));
container.Register(typeof(ICommandHandler<>), 
    new[] { Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly() });

container.RegisterDecorator(typeof(ICommandHandler<>), 
    typeof(SaveChangesCommandHandlerDecorator<>));
container.RegisterDecorator(typeof(ICommandHandler<>),
    typeof(ThreadScopedCommandHandlerDecorator<>),
    Lifestyle.Singleton);

This design will remove the need for UnitOfWork and a (specific) service completely.