Dependency Injection Smells

Matthias Noback (07.Jun.2013 at 14:30, 1 hr )
Talk at Dutch PHP Conference 2013 (English - US)

Rating: 4 of 5

Dependency Injection Smells

Who are you?

Claim talk

Talk claims have been moved to the new Joind.in site.

Please login to the new site to claim your talk

 
Comments closed.

Comments

Rating: 4 of 5

07.Jun.2013 at 15:09 by Marco Pivetta (117 comments)


Rating: 4 of 5

07.Jun.2013 at 15:47 by Paul de Raaij (22 comments)


Rating: 2 of 5

07.Jun.2013 at 15:52 by Núria Aloy (34 comments) via api

Not a very elaborated speech, most of the cases presented as DI smells are actually not using DI.

Rating: 4 of 5

07.Jun.2013 at 16:44 by Anonymous


Rating: 3 of 5

07.Jun.2013 at 17:53 by Ike Devolder (191 comments) via api

had the feeling there was a nice deal of thought put into this talk, i was not entirely convinced by the examples but they could open up some nice discussions

Rating: 5 of 5

07.Jun.2013 at 18:33 by Anonymous

One of the better talks of the day. Great clear presentation. Would have like less examples and more (different) smells to learn to detect more smells. But that's just a detail!

Rating: 4 of 5

07.Jun.2013 at 23:35 by Frits van Campen (30 comments)

I liked the opening slides of 'what is a dependency'.

I do feel like the real-world examples were unnecessary. The interface mistake in Symfony looks more like a bad refactor (find-replace) than a real mistake. And Zend\Crypt just looks poorly designed.

I think you could add some made up examples that look like cases you found in the real-world, but are simplified. We just want to know how to spot the smells, not rant at how bad other people's code is.

I like how you handled questions from the audience.

I did notice a lack of a promised 'physical reaction' to seeing bad code, but I'll chalk that up to good presentation skills ;)

Rating: 5 of 5

08.Jun.2013 at 00:25 by Julian Somesan (11 comments)


Speaker comment:

08.Jun.2013 at 11:53 by Matthias Noback (55 comments)

Thanks for all the feedback everybody! @Núria: you are correct - this talk should have been titled "Dependency Management Smells". I will change the name the next time I'll give this talk.

Rating: 5 of 5

08.Jun.2013 at 13:43 by Pascal de Vink (27 comments)

It was a great pleasure to listen to Matthias talking about all the (wrong) things I see every day. Very well done.

Rating: 3 of 5

08.Jun.2013 at 14:15 by Anonymous


Rating: 4 of 5

08.Jun.2013 at 23:22 by Sander Marechal (37 comments)

A good talk. I enjoyed the real-world examples the most.

Rating: 3 of 5

09.Jun.2013 at 14:32 by Ramon de la Fuente (139 comments)

While I admire the guts it takes to point the finger to some code and say "this should never be done" while almost certainly having authors or contributors in the audience, I do feel that the talk was mislabeled. We where expecting more smells with actual current DI practices.

Rating: 3 of 5

09.Jun.2013 at 22:50 by Samantha Adrichem (13 comments)

Good talk, mostly opinion based. But gave some eyeopeners. Name isn't really true to the talk if you'd ask me though

Rating: 3 of 5

10.Jun.2013 at 00:09 by Jurriaan Ruitenberg (8 comments)

Some of the examples given were open for discussion, which, in a way is good by itself I suppose.

Rating: 5 of 5

10.Jun.2013 at 10:40 by Robbert van den Bogerd (9 comments)

Good talk, clear presentation. Liked the way you took different established frameworks/libraries to illustrate bad practice. I do agree that some more clear general examples would be good to add.

Rating: 5 of 5

10.Jun.2013 at 11:05 by Rafael Dohms (140 comments)

Interesting topic, good information and a nice structure.

Rating: 4 of 5

10.Jun.2013 at 16:14 by Christian Schorn (34 comments)


Rating: 2 of 5

11.Jun.2013 at 10:16 by Jasper N. Brouwer (74 comments)

Could use some more practice speaking. I also felt there were some things missing, like when DI is used where it should _not_ be used. Expected a bit more here.

Rating: 3 of 5

27.Jun.2013 at 09:23 by Anonymous

Confident speaker with a wake-up call for good practises. Unclear if this was a purely theoretical approach though.

I think he was trying to be controversial to trigger a lively discussion - pity that it didn't happen.

© Joind.in 2019