samber/cc-skills-golang

golang-dependency-injection

Comprehensive guide for dependency injection (DI) in Golang.

Vedi sorgente
Documento Skill originale

Contenuto dal repository con titoli, esempi, codice, tabelle, link e immagini preservati.

Persona: You are a Go software architect. You guide teams toward testable, loosely coupled designs — you choose the simplest DI approach that solves the problem, and you never over-engineer.

Orchestration mode: Fan out the three sub-agents described in Refactor mode (global/init discovery, concrete-dependency mapping, service-locator detection) when refactoring a large coupled codebase toward dependency injection, and consolidate into one migration plan. On Claude Code, use ultracode to opt into multi-agent orchestration explicitly.

Modes:

  • Design mode (new project, new service, or adding a service to an existing DI setup): assess the existing dependency graph and lifecycle needs; recommend manual injection or a library from the decision table; then generate the wiring code.
  • Refactor mode (existing coupled code): use up to 3 parallel sub-agents — Agent 1 identifies global variables and init() service setup, Agent 2 maps concrete type dependencies that should become interfaces, Agent 3 locates service-locator anti-patterns (container passed as argument) — then consolidate findings and propose a migration plan.
Community default. A company skill that explicitly supersedes samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-dependency-injection skill takes precedence.

Dependency Injection in Go

Dependency injection (DI) means passing dependencies to a component rather than having it create or find them. In Go, this is how you build testable, loosely coupled applications — your services declare what they need, and the caller (or container) provides it.

This skill is not exhaustive. When using a DI library (google/wire, uber-go/dig, uber-go/fx, samber/do), refer to the library's official documentation and code examples for current API signatures.

For interface-based design foundations (accept interfaces, return structs), see the samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-structs-interfaces skill.

Best Practices Summary

  1. Dependencies MUST be injected via constructors — NEVER use global variables or init() for service setup
  2. Small projects (< 10 services) SHOULD use manual constructor injection — no library needed
  3. Interfaces MUST be defined where consumed, not where implemented — accept interfaces, return structs
  4. NEVER use global registries or package-level service locators
  5. The DI container MUST only exist at the composition root (main() or app startup) — NEVER pass the container as a dependency
  6. Prefer lazy initialization — only create services when first requested
  7. Use singletons for stateful services (DB connections, caches) and transients for stateless ones
  8. Mock at the interface boundary — DI makes this trivial
  9. Keep the dependency graph shallow — deep chains signal design problems
  10. Choose the right DI library for your project size and team — see the decision table below

Why Dependency Injection?

Problem without DIHow DI solves it
Functions create their own dependenciesDependencies are injected — swap implementations freely
Testing requires real databases, APIsPass mock implementations in tests
Changing one component breaks othersLoose coupling via interfaces — components don't know each other's internals
Services initialized everywhereCentralized container manages lifecycle (singleton, factory, lazy)
All services loaded at startupLazy loading — services created only when first requested
Global state and init() functionsExplicit wiring at startup — predictable, debuggable

DI shines in applications with many interconnected services — HTTP servers, microservices, CLI tools with plugins. For a small script with 2-3 functions, manual wiring is fine. Don't over-engineer.

Manual Constructor Injection (No Library)

For small projects, pass dependencies through constructors. See Manual DI examples for a complete application example.

go
// ✓ Good — explicit dependencies, testable
type UserService struct {
    db     UserStore
    mailer Mailer
    logger *slog.Logger
}

func NewUserService(db UserStore, mailer Mailer, logger *slog.Logger) *UserService {
    return &UserService{db: db, mailer: mailer, logger: logger}
}

// main.go — manual wiring
func main() {
    logger := slog.Default()
    db := postgres.NewUserStore(connStr)
    mailer := smtp.NewMailer(smtpAddr)
    userSvc := NewUserService(db, mailer, logger)
    orderSvc := NewOrderService(db, logger)
    api := NewAPI(userSvc, orderSvc, logger)
    api.ListenAndServe(":8080")
}
go
// ✗ Bad — hardcoded dependencies, untestable
type UserService struct {
    db *sql.DB
}

func NewUserService() *UserService {
    db, _ := sql.Open("postgres", os.Getenv("DATABASE_URL")) // hidden dependency
    return &UserService{db: db}
}

Manual DI breaks down when:

  • You have 15+ services with cross-dependencies
  • You need lifecycle management (health checks, graceful shutdown)
  • You want lazy initialization or scoped containers
  • Wiring order becomes fragile and hard to maintain

DI Library Comparison

Go has three main approaches to DI libraries:

Decision Table

CriteriaManualgoogle/wireuber-go/dig + fxsamber/do
Project sizeSmall (< 10 services)Medium-LargeLargeAny size
Type safetyCompile-timeCompile-time (codegen)Runtime (reflection)Compile-time (generics)
Code generationNoneRequired (wire_gen.go)NoneNone
ReflectionNoneNoneYesNone
API styleN/AProvider sets + build tagsStruct tags + decoratorsSimple, generic functions
Lazy loadingManualN/A (all eager)Built-in (fx)Built-in
SingletonsManualBuilt-inBuilt-inBuilt-in
Transient/factoryManualManualBuilt-inBuilt-in
Scopes/modulesManualProvider setsModule system (fx)Built-in (hierarchical)
Health checksManualManualManualBuilt-in interface
Graceful shutdownManualManualBuilt-in (fx)Built-in interface
Container cloningN/AN/AN/ABuilt-in
DebuggingPrint statementsCompile errorsfx.Visualize()ExplainInjector(), web interface
Go versionAnyAnyAny1.18+ (generics)
Learning curveNoneMediumHighLow

Quick Comparison: Wiring Style

The same graph — Config -> Database -> UserStore -> UserService -> API — wired by hand and by a container. The contrast is what the wiring code encodes: an ordered call sequence you maintain, versus a set of providers the container orders for you.

go
// Manual — you own the order; adding a dependency means editing every call site downstream
cfg := NewConfig()
db := NewDatabase(cfg)
store := NewUserStore(db)
svc := NewUserService(store)
api := NewAPI(svc)
api.Run()
// No shutdown hooks, health checks, or lazy loading — add them yourself

// Container (samber/do) — order is derived from the constructor signatures
i := do.New()
do.Provide(i, NewConfig)
do.Provide(i, NewDatabase)
do.Provide(i, NewUserStore)
do.Provide(i, NewUserService)
api := do.MustInvoke[*API](i)
api.Run()
defer i.Shutdown() // shutdown and health checks come from the container

google/wire and uber-go/fx express the same graph differently: wire generates the manual sequence above at build time from a wire.Build provider list (cleanup via func() returned by providers, no lifecycle hooks), while fx registers providers with fx.Provide and resolves them by reflection at runtime with OnStart/OnStop hooks. Full wiring examples for each: google/wire, uber-go/dig + fx, samber/do.

Testing with DI

DI makes testing straightforward — inject mocks instead of real implementations:

go
// Define a mock
type MockUserStore struct {
    users map[string]*User
}

func (m *MockUserStore) FindByID(ctx context.Context, id string) (*User, error) {
    u, ok := m.users[id]
    if !ok {
        return nil, ErrNotFound
    }
    return u, nil
}

// Test with manual injection
func TestUserService_GetUser(t *testing.T) {
    mock := &MockUserStore{
        users: map[string]*User{"1": {ID: "1", Name: "Alice"}},
    }
    svc := NewUserService(mock, nil, slog.Default())

    user, err := svc.GetUser(context.Background(), "1")
    if err != nil {
        t.Fatalf("unexpected error: %v", err)
    }
    if user.Name != "Alice" {
        t.Errorf("got %q, want %q", user.Name, "Alice")
    }
}

Testing with samber/do — Clone and Override

Container cloning creates an isolated copy where you override only the services you need to mock:

go
func TestUserService_WithDo(t *testing.T) {
    // Create a test injector with mock implementation
    testInjector := do.New()

    // Provide the mock UserStore interface
    do.OverrideValue[UserStore](testInjector, &MockUserStore{
        users: map[string]*User{"1": {ID: "1", Name: "Alice"}},
    })

    // Provide other real services as needed
    do.Provide[*slog.Logger](testInjector, func(i *do.Injector) (*slog.Logger, error) {
        return slog.Default(), nil
    })

    svc := do.MustInvoke[*UserService](testInjector)
    user, err := svc.GetUser(context.Background(), "1")
    // ... assertions
}

This is particularly useful for integration tests where you want most services to be real but need to mock a specific boundary (database, external API, mailer).

When to Adopt a DI Library

SignalAction
< 10 services, simple dependenciesStay with manual constructor injection
10-20 services, some cross-cutting concernsConsider a DI library
20+ services, lifecycle management neededStrongly recommended
Need health checks, graceful shutdownUse a library with built-in lifecycle support
Team unfamiliar with DI conceptsStart manual, migrate incrementally

Common Mistakes

MistakeFix
Global variables as dependenciesPass through constructors or DI container
init() for service setupExplicit initialization in main() or container
Depending on concrete typesAccept interfaces at consumption boundaries
Passing the container everywhere (service locator)Inject specific dependencies, not the container
Deep dependency chains (A->B->C->D->E)Flatten — most services should depend on repositories and config directly
Creating a new container per requestOne container per application; use scopes for request-level isolation

Cross-References

  • → See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-samber-do skill for detailed samber/do usage patterns
  • → See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-structs-interfaces skill for interface design and composition
  • → See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-testing skill for testing with dependency injection
  • → See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-project-layout skill for DI initialization placement

References

dallo stesso repository

Altri Skills

Tutti gli Skills
samber
Community

golang-code-style

Golang code style conventions — line length and breaking, variable declarations, control flow clarity, when comments help vs hurt. Use when writing or reviewing Go code, asking about style or clarity, or establishing project coding standards. Not for naming conventions (→ See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-naming skill), linter configuration (→ See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-lint skill), or doc comments (→ See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-documentation skill).

installazioni
40,2K
GitHub Stars
3,2K
Aggiornato
7 set
samber
Community

golang-error-handling

Idiomatic Golang error handling — creation, wrapping with %w, errors.Is/As, errors.Join, custom error types, sentinel errors, panic/recover, the single handling rule, structured logging with slog, HTTP request logging middleware, and samber/oops for production errors. Built to make logs usable at scale with log aggregation 3rd-party tools. Apply when creating, wrapping, inspecting, or logging errors in Go code. For samber/oops specifics → See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-samber-oops skill; for slog handler ecosystem → See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-samber-slog skill.

installazioni
39,6K
GitHub Stars
3,2K
Aggiornato
7 set
samber
Community

golang-testing

Production-ready Golang tests — table-driven tests, testify suites and mocks, parallel tests, fuzzing, fixtures, goroutine leak detection with goleak, snapshot testing, code coverage, integration tests, idiomatic test naming. Use when writing or reviewing Go tests, choosing a testing approach, setting up Go test CI, or debugging flaky/slow tests. For testify-specific APIs see samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-stretchr-testify; for measurement methodology see samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-benchmark.

installazioni
39,6K
GitHub Stars
3,2K
Aggiornato
7 set
samber
Community

golang-design-patterns

Idiomatic Golang design patterns — functional options, constructor APIs, init() and global-state avoidance, enums, panic vs error decisions, resource management and lifecycle, graceful shutdown, timeouts and retries, streaming and iterators, and architecture styles (clean, hexagonal, DDD, flat). Apply when choosing between architectural patterns, implementing functional options, designing constructor APIs, setting up graceful shutdown, applying resilience patterns, or asking which idiomatic Go pattern fits a specific problem. Not for wiring a DI container or comparing DI libraries (→ See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-dependency-injection skill), nor for error wrapping, errors.Is/As, or logging mechanics (→ See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-error-handling skill).

installazioni
38,9K
GitHub Stars
3,2K
Aggiornato
7 set