typestack/typedi compatibility layer proposal

[freshgum-bubbles]

Compatibility layer with typestack/typedi

#158 essentially proposes a compatibility layer which allows the usage of ++ in places where typestack's implementation is expected.

I definitely think this is worth exploring; it's not a use-case I originally considered,
but I do think it would expand the horizons of where ++ could be used.

A wise investment would be creating a list of incompatibilities with source.
Let's do that here.

• xxx

General compatibility with typestack

Compatibility with typestack has been a bit of a bug bear of mine.
I've been meaning to make it easier to migrate to this one.
I can only imagine the work required to have to migrate at-once; this could definitely be made easier.

[intellix]

would this mean addressing the doubled references? #152 - then we could swap the dependency and we're done. Right now it would be a huge effort for us to go through every file and double up the references everywhere

[freshgum-bubbles]

would this mean addressing the doubled references? #152 - then we could swap the dependency and we're done. Right now it would be a huge effort for us to go through every file and double up the references everywhere

Yes, that would be supported. I'm aiming for 1:1 compatibility with typestack's implementation, where it's just a matter of swapping the typedi import with @freshgum/typedi/contrib/....

The ContainerInstance implementation is partially completed, alongside that of ContainerRegistry.

Note that I'm still working on this suite: it's going to be a moderately large effort, as I'd like to get my implementation to pass typestack's test suite (which means importing https://github.com/typestack/typedi as a submodule and applying a .patch for the test files' imports.)