> That said, there is still one issue that has hit me on each of
> these libraries getting configuration out of the different containers. As
> each framework stores configuration in a different way there seems to be no
> uniform way to retrieve it. This leads to unnecessary implementation
> specific code.
<snip>
> As you can see, this is one area where PSR-11 could use some improvement.
> I did see a thread dated few years ago where someone had started a
> conversation to address this. Has there been any movement or other
> conversations about this? If not, is there anything I can do to help move
> this conversation forward?
There has been some work on it in the container-interop group; the
project is called "service providers":
-
https://github.com/container-interop/service-provider
There's not been a ton of movement on it, but the idea is pretty solid.
In parallel, the ZF community has been working on a number of
"zend-{container type}-config" projects that are attempting to
identify common configuration features of many containers, and provide
a translation layer around them. So far, we've identified:
- aliases (though these could likely be addressed by a specialized factory type)
- invokables (constructor-less classes; could also be addressed by a
specialized factory type)
- factories
- delegators/decorators (these are similar to the "extensions"
functionality of the service-provider project)
- fallbacks/abstract factories (these produce an instance for any
given service name)
I'm involved with the container-interop team, but haven't had time to
drive any discussions recently. I'm sure I speak for the others when I
say your feedback and input would be welcome!
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
mweiero...@gmail.com
https://mwop.net/