softwaremill / softwaremill/macwire
Support the wirering of closures instead classes?
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Scala
- Stars
- 1.3k
- Forks
- 77
- Avg merge
- 9m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 4
Description
I'm not sure if this fits into the project's scope and if it's generally possible:
Instead of wiring classes, I like to wire/bind closures. This offers to provide the interface design within the constructor or even plain functions, without the knowledge of the implementation.
It is very lightweight.
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
No file, test, or entry point is named. Start by reviewing MacWire's compile-time dependency-injection scope and how it currently wires classes, then determine whether closure binding has a defined interface and implementation path; done would require an agreed design and corresponding coverage.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- scala
- Domain
- tooling
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100