Can we get a set/list/collection of instances based in some interface? Eg.: getAll<Deeplink>(...

# koin

[Pedro Francisco de Sousa Neto]

Can we get a set/list/collection of instances based in some interface?

Eg.: getAll<Deeplink>()

[curioustechizen]

Yes there is a getAll<T>() that you can use for this:
https://insert-koin.io/docs/reference/koin-annotations/definitions#injecting-a-list-of-dependencies---listt

[arnaud.giuliani]

yes getAll() can all request definitions bound to T type

[Pedro Francisco de Sousa Neto]

It works only with Koin Annotations?

[Pedro Francisco de Sousa Neto]

I looked the library, this code is inside in :core. So the answer is no. blob smile happy

[arnaud.giuliani]

exact ^^

[Pedro Francisco de Sousa Neto]

I didn't tried it yet but I was thinking about it when I was driving...

// My classes
class DeeplinkOne : Deeplink()
class DeeplinkTwo : Deeplink()

// Declarations
factory { DeeplinkOne() }
factory { DeeplinkTwo() }

// Consumption
getAll<Deeplink>()

My getAll will return only DeeplinkTwo, because it has the same signature/interface for Deeplink right? I'm thinking this because if I'm not wrong, the Koin will override the DeeplinkOne() wtih DeeplinkTwo().

[Pedro Francisco de Sousa Neto]

I've implemented and validated. The override happens.

Is it possible to achieve the return of DeeplinkOne and DeeplinkTwo using getAll()?

[Pedro Francisco de Sousa Neto]

// My classes
class DeeplinkOne : Deeplink()
class DeeplinkTwo : Deeplink()

// Declarations
factory(named("a1")) { DeeplinkOne() }
factory(named("a2")) { DeeplinkTwo() }

// Consumption
getAll<Deeplink>()

I added a named("xyz") and worked for getAll(). But... that's not a good solution for my problem. Does anyone have a better one?

[Pedro Francisco de Sousa Neto]

@arnaud.giuliani and @curioustechizen, I'm resurrecting the thread 😅.

[arnaud.giuliani]

Problem here https://kotlinlang.slack.com/archives/C67HDJZ2N/p1703013556766489?thread_ts=1702648414.130729&amp;cid=C67HDJZ2N
is you are declaring 2 definitions with same root type. Then the last override the first.
To have getAll() workable, best is to approach with this kind of definition:

[arnaud.giuliani]

class DeeplinkOne : Deeplink()
class DeeplinkTwo : Deeplink()

// explicit binding
factory { DeeplinkOne() } bind Deeplink::class
factory { DeeplinkTwo() } bind Deeplink::class

// you have both here
getAll<Deeplink>()

[Pedro Francisco de Sousa Neto]

You're right, using explicit binding it works!
The explanation in docs are here.

But why override was not applied to explicit bind if every dependency are binding with same interface?

I've sure I understand the feature, but I don't get why this works! 😆

[curioustechizen]

This should also with with single declarations, correct?

interface SignOutAware {
	fun onSignOut()
}

interface FooRepository
interface BarRepository


class FooRepositoryImpl: FooRepository, SignOutAware
class BarRepositoryImpl: BarRepository, SignOutAware

class SignOutUseCase(signOutAwares: List<SignOutAware>)

val fooModule = module {
	single { FooRepositoryImpl } binds arrayOf(FooRepository::class, SignOutAware::class)
}

val barModule = module {
	single { BarRepositoryImpl } binds arrayOf(BarRepository::class, SignOutAware::class)
}

val appModule = module {
	includes(fooModule, barModule)
	factory {
		SignOutUseCase(signOutAwares = getAll<SignOutAware>()) // Should return list containing both FooRepositoryImpl and BarRepositoryImpl
	}
}

[arnaud.giuliani]

yep

[curioustechizen]

@arnaud.giuliani Should this be documented? The fact the binds will cancel the default override mechanism is not obvious.

This is also relevant outside the context of getAll(). For example in the above case, if I was not using binds then I would have expected by inject<SignOutAware>() to returns BarRepositoryImpl because of the override mechanism. But using binds changes this.