* [Defining new actions and filters](#defining-new-actions-and-filters)
* [Writing unit tests](#writing-unit-tests)
+ [Mocking dependencies](#mocking-dependencies)
This directory is home to new WooCommerce class files under the `Automattic\WooCommerce` namespace using [PSR-4](https://www.php-fig.org/psr/psr-4/) file naming. This is to take full advantage of autoloading.
Ideally, all the new code for WooCommerce should consist of classes following the PSR-4 naming and living in this directory, and the code in [the `includes` directory](https://github.com/woocommerce/woocommerce/tree/master/includes/README.md) should receive the minimum amount of changes required for bug fixing. This will not always be possible but that should be the rule of thumb.
A [PSR-11](https://www.php-fig.org/psr/psr-11/) container is in place for registering and resolving the classes in this directory by using the [dependency injection](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dependency_injection) pattern. There are tools in place to interact with legacy code (and code outside the `src`directory in general) in a way that makes it easy to write unit tests.
Composer is used to generate autoload class-maps for the files here. The stable release of WooCommerce comes with the autoloader, however, if you're running a development version you'll need to use Composer.
If you don't have Composer installed, go and check how to [install Composer](https://github.com/woocommerce/woocommerce/wiki/How-to-set-up-WooCommerce-development-environment) and then continue here.
WooCommerce uses a [PSR-11](https://www.php-fig.org/psr/psr-11/) compatible container for registering and resolving all the classes in this directory by using the [dependency injection](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dependency_injection) pattern. More specifically, we use [the container from The PHP League](https://container.thephpleague.com/); this is relevant when registering classes, but not when resolving them. The full class name of the container used is `Automattic\WooCommerce\Container` (it uses the PHP League's container under the hood).
_Resolving_ a class means asking the container to provide an instance of the class (or interface). _Registering_ a class means telling the container how the class should be resolved.
In principle, the container should be used to register and resolve all the classes in the `src` directory. The exception might be data-only classes that could be created the old way (using a plain `new` statement); but as a rule of thumb, the container should always be used.
There are two ways to resolve registered classes, depending on from where they are resolved:
* Classes in the `src` directory specify their dependencies as `container_init` arguments, which are automatically supplied by the container when the class is resolved (this is called _dependency injection_).
* For code in the `includes` directory there's a `wc_get_container` function that will return the container, then its `get` method can be used to resolve any class.
### Resolving classes
There are two ways to resolve registered classes, depending on from where they need to be resolved:
When a class in the `src` directory depends on other one classes from the same directory, it should use method injection. This means specifying these dependencies as arguments in a `container_init` method with appropriate type hints, and storing these in private variables, ready to be used when needed:
Whenever the container is about to resolve `TheClassWithDependencies` it will also resolve `Service1Class` and `Service2Class` and pass them as method arguments to the requested class. If these service classes have method arguments too then those will also be appropriately resolved recursively.
A "lazy" approach is also possible if needed: you can specify the container itself as a method argument (using `\Psr\Container\ContainerInterface` as type hint), and use its `get` method to obtain the required instance at the appropriate time:
When you need to use classes defined in the `src` directory from within legacy code in `includes`, use the `wc_get_container` function to get the instance of the container, then resolve the required class with `get`:
This is also the recommended approach when moving code from `includes` to `src` while keeping the existing entry points for the old code in place for compatibility.
Worth noting: the container will throw a `ContainerException` when receiving a request for resolving a class that hasn't been registered. All classes need to have been registered prior to being resolved.
### Registering classes
For a class to be resolvable using the container, it needs to have been previously registered in the same container.
The `Container` class is "read-only", in that it has a `get` method to resolve classes but it doesn't have any method to register classes. Instead, class registration is done by using [service providers](https://container.thephpleague.com/3.x/service-providers/). That's how the whole process would go when creating a new class:
First, create the class in the appropriate namespace (and thus in the matching folder), remember that the base namespace for the classes in the `src` directory is `Atuomattic\WooCommerce`. If the class depends on other classes from `src`, specify these dependencies as `container_init` arguments in detailed above.
Then, create a `<class name>ServiceProvider` class in the `src/Internal/DependencyManagement/ServiceProviders` folder (and thus in the appropriate namespace) as follows:
Last (but certainly not least, don't forget this step!), add the class name of the service provider to the `$service_providers` property in the `Container` class.
Worth noting:
* In the example the service provider is used to register only one class, but service providers can be used to register a group of related classes. The `$provides` property must contain all the names of the classes that the provider can register.
* The container will invoke the provider `register` method the first time any of the classes in `$provides` is resolved.
* If you look at [the service provider documentation](https://container.thephpleague.com/3.x/service-providers/) you will see that classes are registered using `this->getContainer()->add`. WooCommerce's `AbstractServiceProvider` adds a utility `add` method itself that serves the same purpose.
* You can use `share` instead of `add` to register single-instance classes (the class is instantiated only once and cached, so the same instance is returned every time the class is resolved).
If the class being registered has `container_init` arguments then the `add` (or `share`) method must be followed by as many `addArguments` calls as needed. WooCommerce's `AbstractServiceProvider` adds a utility `add_with_auto_arguments` method (and a sibling `share_with_auto_arguments` method) that uses reflection to figure out and register all the `container_init` arguments (which need to have type hints). Please have in mind the possible performance penalty incurred by the usage of reflection when using this helper method.
An alternative version of the service provider, which is used to register both the class and its dependency, and which takes advantage of `add_with_auto_arguments`, could be as follows:
By default, the `add` and `share` methods instruct the container to resolve the registered class by using `new` to create a new instance of the class. But these methods accept an optional `$concrete` argument that can be used to tell the container to resolve the class in a different way. `$concrete` may be one of the following:
* A class name
The supplied class name will be instantiated when the registered class name is resolved. This is especially useful to register interfaces, example:
Note that if the closure is defined as a function with arguments, the supplied parameters will be resolved too.
#### A note on legacy classes
The container is intended for registering **only** classes in the `src` folder. There is a check in place to prevent classes outside the root `Automattic\Woocommerce` namespace from being registered.
This implies that classes outside `src` can't be dependency-injected, and thus must not be used as type hints in `container_init` arguments. There are mechanisms in place to interact with "outside" code (including code from the `includes` folder and third-party code) in a way that makes it easy to write unit tests.
While it's up to the developer to choose the appropriate namespaces for any newly created classes, and those namespaces should make sense from a semantic point of view, there's one namespace that has a special meaning: `Automattic\WooCommerce\Internal`.
Classes in `Automattic\WooCommerce\Internal` are meant to be WooCommerce infrastructure code that might change in future releases. In other words, for code inside that namespace, **backwards compatibility of the public surface is not guaranteed**: future releases might include breaking changes including renaming or renaming classes, renaming or removing public methods, or changing the signature of public methods. The code in this namespace is considered "internal", whereas all the other code in `src` is considered "public".
What this implies for you as developer depends on what type of contribution are you making:
* **If you are woking on WooCommerce core:** When you need to add a new class please think carefully if the class could be useful for plugins. If you really think so, add it to the appropriate namespace rooted at `Automattic\WooCommerce`. If not, add it to the appropriate namespace but rooted at `Automattic\WooCommerce\Internal`.
* When in doubt, always make the code internal. If an internal class is later deemed to be worth being made public, the change can be made easily (by just changing the class namespace) and nothing will break. Turning a public class into an internal class, on the other hand, is impossible since it could break existing plugins.
* **If you are a plugin developer:** You should **never** use code from the `Automattic\WooCommerce\Internal` namespace in your plugins. Doing so might cause your plugin to break in future versions of WooCommerce.
## Interacting with legacy code
Here by "legacy code" we refer mainly to the old WooCommerce code in the `includes` directory, but the mechanisms described in this section are useful for dealing with any code outside the `src` directory.
The code in the `src` directory can for sure interact directly with legacy code. A function needs to be called? Call it. You need an instance of an object? Instantiate it. The problem is that this makes the code difficult to test: it's not easy to mock functions (unless you use [hacks](https://github.com/woocommerce/woocommerce/blob/master/tests/Tools/CodeHacking/README.md), or objects that are instantiated directly with `new` or whose instance is retrieved via a `TheClass::instance()` method).
But we want the WooCommerce code base (and especially the code in `src`) to be well covered by unit tests, and so there are mechanisms in place to interact with legacy code while keeping the code testable.
### The `LegacyProxy` class
`LegacyProxy` is a class that contains three public methods intended to allow interaction with legacy code:
*`get_instance_of`: Retrieves an instance of a legacy (non-`src`) class.
*`call_function`: Calls a standalone function.
*`call_static`: Calls a static method in a class.
Whenever a `src` class needs to get an instance of a legacy class, or call a function, or call a static method from another class, and that would make the code difficult to test, it should use the `LegacyProxy` methods instead.
But how does using `LegacyProxy` help in making the code testable? The trick is that when tests run what is registered instead of `LegacyProxy` is an instance of `MockableLegacyProxy`, a class with the same public surface but with additional methods that allow to easily mock legacy classes, functions and static methods.
However, the recommended way (especially when no other dependencies need to be dependency-injected) is to use the equivalent methods in the `WooCommerce` class via the `WC()` helper, like this:
Both ways are completely equivalent since the helper methods are just doing `wc_get_container()->get( LegacyProxy::class )->...` under the hood.
### Using the mockable proxy in tests
When unit tests run the container will return an instance of `MockableLegacyProxy` when `LegacyProxy` is resolved. This class has the same public methods as `LegacyProxy` but also the following ones:
*`register_class_mocks`: defines mocks for classes that are retrieved via `get_instance_of`.
*`register_function_mocks`: defines mocks for functions that are invoked via `call_function`.
*`register_static_mocks`: defines mocks for functions that are invoked via `call_static`.
These methods could be accessed via `wc_get_container()->get( LegacyProxy::class )->register...` directly from the tests, but the preferred way is to use the equivalent helper methods offered by the `WC_Unit_Test_Case` class,: `register_legacy_proxy_class_mocks`, `register_legacy_proxy_function_mocks` and `register_legacy_proxy_static_mocks`.
Here's an example of how function mocks are defined:
```php
// In this context '$this' is a class that extends WC_Unit_Test_Case
return "I'm the mock of the_function_name and I was invoked with $param1 and $param2.";
},
)
);
```
Of course, for the cases where no mocks are defined `MockableLegacyProxy` works the same way as `LegacyProxy`.
Please see [the code of the MockableLegacyProxy class](https://github.com/woocommerce/woocommerce/blob/master/tests/Tools/DependencyManagement/MockableLegacyProxy.php) and [its unit tests](https://github.com/woocommerce/woocommerce/blob/master/tests/php/src/Proxies/MockableLegacyProxyTest.php) for more detailed usage instructions and examples.
### But how does `get_instance_of` work?
We use a container to resolve instances of classes in the `src` directory, but how does the legacy proxy's `get_instance_of` know how to resolve legacy classes?
This is a mostly ad-hoc process. When a class has a special way to be instantiated or retrieved (e.g. a static `instance` method), then that is used; otherwise the method fallbacks to simply creating a new instance of the class using `new`.
This means that the `get_instance_of` method will most likely need to evolve over time to cover additional special cases. Take a look at the method code in [LegacyProxy](https://github.com/woocommerce/woocommerce/blob/master/src/Proxies/LegacyProxy.php) for details on how to properly make changes to the method.
### Creating specialized proxies
While helpful to make the code testable, using the legacy proxy can make the code somewhat more difficult to read or maintain, so it should be used judiciously and only when really needed to make the code properly testable.
That said, an alternative middle ground would be to create more specialized cases for frequently used pieces of legacy code, for example:
```php
class ActionsProxy {
public function did_action( $tag ) {
return did_action( $tag );
}
public function apply_filters( $tag, $value, ...$parameters ) {
Note however that such a class would have to be explicitly dependency-injected (unless additional helper methods are defined in the `WooCommerce` class), and that you would need to create a pairing mock class (e.g. `MockableActionsProxy`) and replace the original registration using `wc_get_container()->replace( ActionsProxy::class, MockableActionsProxy::class )`.
WordPress' hooks (actions and filters) are a very powerful extensibility mechanism and it's the core tool that allows WooCommerce extensions to be developer. However it has been often (ab)used in the WooCommerce core codebase to drive internal logic, e.g. an action is triggered from within one class or function with the assumption that somewhere there's some other class or function that will handle it and continue whatever processing is supposed to happen.
In order to keep the code as easy as reasonably possible to read and maintain, **hooks shouldn't be used to drive WooCommerce's internal logic and processes**. If you need the services of a given class or function, please call these directly (by using dependency-injection or the legacy proxy as appropriate to get access to the desired service). **New hooks should be introduced only if they provide a valuable extension point for plugins**.
As usual, there might be reasonable exceptions to this; but please keep this rule in mind whenever you consider creating a new hook.
## Writing unit tests
Unit tests are a fundamental tool to keep the code reliable and reasonably safe from regression errors. To that end, any new code added to the WooCommerce codebase, but especially to the `src` directory, should be reasonably covered by such tests.
**If you are a WooCommerce core team member or a contributor from other team at Automattic:** Please write unit tests to cover any code addition or modification that you make to the `src` directory (and ideally the same for the `includes` directory, by the way). There are always reasonable exceptions, but the rule of thumb is that all code should be covered by tests.
**If you are an external contributor:** When adding or changing code on the WooCommerce codebase, and especially in the `src` directory, adding unit tests is recommended but not mandatory: no contributions will be rejected solely for lacking unit tests. However, please try to at least make the code easily testable by honoring the container and dependency-injection mechanism, and by using the legacy proxy to interact with legacy code when needed. If you do so, the WooCommerce team or other contributors will be able to add the missing tests.
Since all the dependencies for classes in this directory are dependency-injected or retrieved lazily by directly accessing the container, it's easy to mock them by either manually creating a mock class with the same public surface or by using [PHPUnit's test doubles](https://phpunit.readthedocs.io/en/9.2/test-doubles.html):
$sut = new TheClassToTest( $dependency_mock ); //sut = System Under Test
$result = $sut->do_something();
$this->assertEquals( $result, 'the expected result' );
```
However, while this works well for simple scenarios, in the real world dependencies will often have other dependencies in turn, so instantiating all the required intermediate objects will be complex. To make things easier, while tests run the `Container` class is replaced with an `ExtendedContainer` class that has a couple of additional methods:
*`replace`: allows defining a new replacement concrete for a given class registration.
*`reset_all_resolved`: discards all the cached resolutions. You may need when mocking classes that have been defined as shared.
It's worth noting that at unit testing session bootstrap time `reset_all_resolved` is called once to reset any cached resolutions made during WC install, and `replace` is used to swap the `LegacyProxy` with a `MockableLegacyProxy`.
The same example using `replace`:
```php
$dependency_mock = somehow_create_mock();
$container = wc_get_container();
$container->reset_all_resolved(); //if either the SUT or the dependency are shared
$this->assertEquals( $result, 'the expected result' );
```
Note: of course all of this applies to dependencies from the `src` directory, for mocking legacy dependencies [the `MockableLegacyProxy`](#using-the-mockable-proxy-in-tests) should be used instead.
