Fighting over-usage of "dynamic" dependency without introducing infinite loop about needle

[rudro]

We use RxSwift heavily so my Combine API calls may be a bit off. I think the setup in the Child seems fine to me I ignore the one of type Int. Let's focus on the aStream var. That seems good. So the parent creates a subset and the child get's access to it using Needle. So in the parent I would have expected to see something like :

    var aStreamSetupByParent: AnyPublisher<Int, Never> { // note: type must match what is asked for by the child dependency protocol
          return shared { PassthroughSubject<CGPoint, Never>().eraseToAnyPublisher() } // note: the shared makes it so you get the same instance each time you access the var
  }

[rudro]

Also, it's a bit confusing, but streams are not considered "dynamic" dependencies as the instances of the streams are known at compile time. "Dynamic" dependencies are say a passcode the user types in and then you would pass that Int into the constructor of a component class.

[aurelienp]

If I understand correctly, you are saying that the pattern of forwarding to myVC in MyComponent.aStreamSetupByParent is not correct. Instead, components should be in charge of creating the instances.

I guess this also means you encourage injecting such streams in MyVC.init? But doesn't that force us to change MyVC implementation, hence breaking the promise that Needle will not interfere with code that is outside of Component?

Also, it's a bit confusing, but streams are not considered "dynamic" dependencies as the instances of the streams are known at compile time.

Sorry if my message was confusing. The code I shared was to illustrate the infinite-loop issue, hence does not rely on dynamic dependency. Could you follow the trace after the call to aChildVCBuilder.myChildVC and see how it end up in an infinite loop (because shared relies on a recursive lock I guess).

[rudro]

Right, the stream instance should be created at the parent. e.g here https://github.com/uber/needle/blob/master/Sample/MVC/TicTacToe/Sources/Root/RootComponent.swift#L27.

Then a child VC will ask for this stream and constructor inject it (into the VC) as seen in this file: https://github.com/uber/needle/blob/master/Sample/MVC/TicTacToe/Sources/ScoreSheet/ScoreSheetComponent.swift

I'm not sure I understand why this breaks the promise Needle will interfere with code outside of the Component.

[aurelienp]

I'm not sure I understand why this breaks the promise Needle will interfere with code outside of the Component.

You're right, indeed. It seems arbitrary to say that when it comes to injecting streams rather than injecting other sort of things such as VC builders.

It just seems somewhat unnatural to me that so much ends up being injected in a VC, just because a VC lower in the hierarchy depends on something. But that's a matter of habit and nothing wrong with this from a theoretical point of view. Needle is encouraging to be a DI maximalist :)

Thanks for all the replies. I'll mark as resolved.