Not able to access Container class private fields

[tutok]

Many of the Container class fields should be protected instead of private. The current implementation of the Container class actually does not expose any way to "extend"/"improve"/"adjust to customer needs", because it is not possible to do anything more than is exposed via its public API.

InversifyJS/src/container/container.ts

Line 19 in f65cacf

class Container implements interfaces.Container {

Expected Behavior

I would like to extend the Container class and have access to more advanced API, like _bindingDictionary

Current Behavior

Even I create a class MyContainer which is derived from class MyContainer I am not able to access its internal.

 class MyContainer extends Container {

   get bindings() {
       return this._bindingDictionary;  // not possible 
   }     
 }

Possible Solution

change access modifier of Container class fields from private to protected.

Not only for _bindingDictionary and not for each current private, but probably the vast majority of its private should be protected.

Steps to Reproduce (for bugs)

n/a

Context

I am not able to extend the functionality of Container class, the current implementation is almost identical to the one that would have sealed modifier.

Your Environment

• Version used: n/a
• Environment name and version (e.g. Chrome 39, node.js 5.4): n/a
• Operating System and version (desktop or mobile): n/a
• Link to your project: n/a

Stack trace

n/a

[c100k]

Hey @tutok,
I know this issues is old, but have you found a workaround different from the one I present in #1584 ? Also, have you started working on proposing a PR for this ? If so, would be happy to help and collaborate.

[notaphplover]

Hey @tutok , @c100k , I'm giving some love to the project again.

I am afraid the container is not so simple. The binding dictionary is private for some very good reasons:

• You should never update it manually without relying in the container public API.
• The _bindingDictionary does not necesarily represent a real binding dictionary since ancestor containers might have _bindingDictionary properties which, all together can be used to build the real binding dictionary.

I don't think we should expose this dictionary for now. We might extend the container API with a getAllBindngs method instead to provide what you guys expect from _bindingDictionary.

The same could probably be discussed regarding other private fields. Talking about every private field of a container is way out of the scope of a single issue, I'll close this one for now. Feel free to discuss specific properties like _bindingDictionary in #1584