From: Alexey Petrushin Date: 2011-09-25T04:05:49+09:00 Subject: Re: IoC / DI is still alive (new release of Micon DI) I watched this talk, and I'm agreed that there's no need in AOP technics provided by DI - because Ruby is dynamic language and has metaprogramming capabilities that are way more powerful and handy than DI AOP. But I disagreed with the conclusion out of this fact - that there's no need for DI in Ruby. Because AOP is only one aspect of DI, and although You don't need AOP, You may benefit from others capabilities. No matter how Your code looks like - lots of Lego building blocks (Java) or free-design with plasticine, You has to solve following problems: - where the component's code is located. - in what order should it be loaded. - what configs does the component needs to be properly initialized. - where those configs are stored. - how to change configs in different environments (dev/test/prod database settings, routes, ...). - where are dependencies for component and how they should be initialized. - how to replace some components with custom implementation (without examining its code and monkey-patching). - how to assembly parts of application for specs/tests. - how to restore state after each spec/test (isolate it from each other). - how to control life-cycle of dynamically created components. - connecting components to assemble an application. DI simplifies these tasks and some of them solves completely automatically. And if You think that You don't need any structure and want complete freedom - why do You use Rake? It limits Your freedom to work with the Ruby plasticine and introduce extra abstraction, so why do You use it? -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.