Adding to Service Container page

[richardmiller-zz]

I have added setter and property injection examples to the Service Container page as per the comments on https://gist.github.com/968411

Is this an appropriate place for them?

[stof]

You should use the .. note:: or .. tip:: directive here

[richardmiller-zz]

I have added a .. note:: directive

[Shurakai]

I think code examples for annotation are missing too.

Furthermore, I suggest to add a note that property injection must be used restrictively and with much care; disadvantages should be listed.

[richardmiller-zz]

Are code examples for annotation needed? They are not there for any of the examples already on this page. If they are needed, are they added to the config blocks along with the yaml, xml and php examples?

[richardmiller-zz]

With regards to property injection. I agree about adding a note about its use. It certainly feels like the wrong way to do the injection to me. However, gut feeling aside, the only concrete disadvantage I can think of at the moment is not being able to type hint since the property does need to be made public. Anyone got any others I can add?

[weaverryan]

Per the value of property injection (for non-public properties) - the discussion is being waged here: symfony/symfony#858

The big disadvantage imo is that (if your properties are protected/private), your object can no longer be instantiated in a traditional way - Reflection (or the DIC) must be used to set the properties.

Per the annotations, is there an annotation method that's supported in core? If so, it should be mentioned with the others inside the configuration block, using .. code-block:: php-annotations.

[weaverryan]

And also, when you add some "warnings" here, it might be ok to say that "Reflection" is used, which is a way of going beyond what PHP normally lets you do. Otherwise, this might confuse someone who's starting to understand OO, but then suddenly sees a protected property being accessed.

[richardmiller-zz]

Quite happy to add some warnings about property injection, although after reading the debate about it, would it be better to remove it from this section altogether and have something about it in a cookbook article instead?

[schmittjoh]

I agree.

Regardless of the form of property injection that we will support eventually, it should be clear that the preferred forms of injection are constructor args, and setter injection.

[richardmiller-zz]

I can't find anything to suggest that DI by annotation is in core. It doesn't make any sense to me to be specifying the dependency in the class file even in the comments, may as well not use DI at all if you are going to do that. Am I missing something with this?

[weaverryan]

Thanks for everyone's comments - I've merged this is (it's an important piece to have included).