loading...
Cover image for Episode 004 - The Program and Startup classes - ASP.NET Core: From 0 to overkill

Episode 004 - The Program and Startup classes - ASP.NET Core: From 0 to overkill

joaofbantunes profile image João Antunes Originally published at blog.codingmilitia.com on ・8 min read

In this post/video we take a step back to look at some important infrastructure parts of an ASP.NET Core application - the Program and the Startup classes. Real advancements on our reference project will be a bit on hold for some episodes, as we focus on core concepts that help understanding what we will be doing going forward.

For the walk-through you can check the next video, but if you prefer a quick read, skip to the written synthesis.

The playlist for the whole series is here.

Intro

In the last episode we started our group management application using MVC. Today however, we’ll take a step back to look at some core concepts in ASP.NET Core, so we can better understand what’s coming in the future, and not be overwhelmed with too many concepts at the same time.

The Program class

Just a console application

An ASP.NET Core application is basically a console application that hosts a web server (Kestrel). Knowing this, there’s no surprise to find a Program class with the classic Main method we see on traditional console applications.

This means we can do pretty much anything as we would on a console application before running the server, mainly things that we don’t want to do in the context of the ASP.NET Core application per se. For instance, something I’ve seen being done here is to check if the database is up do date and apply any required migrations before starting the application, although one could argue that:

  1. Shouldn’t be doing this kind of database changes automatically on application start (at least in production)
  2. Even if we really want to make these database changes, we can do it in the Startup class (or another step of preparing the web host).

Building the web host

To get our application listening to HTTP requests, we must create a WebHost. Prior to ASP.NET Core 2.0, there was more configuration we needed to do to get it running, but with that version some helper methods were added we just need one line to get the WebHost started: WebHost.CreateDefaultBuilder(args).UseStartup<Startup>(); (being args the arguments passed in when starting the application through the command line).

Of course this helper methods just abstracts away what was needed to do every time we wanted to create a new application. If we’re not happy with the default, we can bypass this helper and do it ourselves. For reference, we can just go and see the source code for the helper method on GitHub - here’s the link to the version on ASP.NET Core 2.1.

Looking at the CreateDefaultBuilder code we see somethings that one who worked with ASP.NET Core < 2.0 will recognize, like configuring the use of Kestrel, defining the application’s root content directory, setting up configuration sources, setting up logging and a couple other things. Having this abstracted away is nice, because many times it will suffice, but it’s important to know it’s there, and we can override it to match our needs.

Besides the CreateDefaultBuilder we see the call to UseStartup<Startup>(). We’ll take a closer look at the Startup class in a moment, but this method call basically tells the WebHostBuilder the class that should be use for initialization purposes. Doing this is optional, as we could, instead of using the Startup class, call ConfigureServices and Configure directly on the WebHostBuilder.

To get our application running, we call Build to get the instance of WebHost out of the WebHostBuilder, and then Run on it to start.

The Startup class

Like I mentioned earlier, the Startup class contains some initialization code for our ASP.NET Core application, namely in the form of the ConfigureServices and Configure methods.

The names of the methods are not great, but to make it clear, ConfigureServices is where we configure dependency injection - as we saw in the last episode, services.AddMvc() adds MVC’s required services to the DI container - and Configure is where we configure the request handling pipeline - as we’ve seen, app.UseMvc() adds MVC’s request handling middleware to the application’s pipeline.

Now let’s play a little more with this methods, to get a better feel of their uses as a preparation to dive a little bit deeper in the next episodes.

Configure method

Like we talked, the Configure method is where we configure our request handling pipeline. Given we’re building an MVC application, we added app.UseMvc() to register MVC’s middleware to handle the requests. The MVC middleware should be the last one registered, as we want it to be the final handler for our requests in most cases, but we can add some middlewares earlier in the pipeline to enrich the request/response or even handle things that we don’t want MVC to handle.

Creating a simple middleware

Let’s start with creating a very simple middleware that adds an header to every response. To keep it really simple we’ll use the app.Use(...) method (extension method of IApplicationBuilder) and pass it a lambda function that represents the middleware. There are more ways to create middlewares, we’ll look at those in a future episode.

As we’ve talking, the basic idea of middlewares is that they work like in a chain - a middleware is invoked, it can do something, then pass the request along to the next middleware and finally do something else when the next middleware is done. There can be cases where the next middleware isn’t invoked, for instance in a authorization middleware, if the user isn’t authenticated, it can immediately stop the request, returning a response by itself. Given this, the base of the middleware will be as follows:

With this in mind, our middleware for adding a response header will be really simple, having only logic before invoking the next middleware.

As you can see, the first thing the middleware does is register a callback on context.Response.Starting(), so the lambda passed in is executed before the response starts being delivered to the client. Next and final thing the middleware does is invoking next(), so the next middleware in the chain can start to do its thing (in this case, the MVC middleware).

If we now make a request to the application and check the headers, among other that are already put there by ASP.NET Core, we can see the added X-Powered-By.

Response header added by middleware

Using static files

Now that we made a really simple middleware, let’s take a look at another builtin one, the static files middleware. In the Configure method, before our custom response header middleware, we simply add the line app.UseStaticFiles();. Now we can add a wwwroot folder to the root of the web application project, and any static file we put there. This is just the default place from which the middleware retrieves files from, we can configure other folders or even providers that fetch images from a database, external image providers, etc.

Remember, the order in which the middlewares are registered is important, so given that we used the static files middleware before the custom response header one, the header won’t be present when we fetch static files, only when the request reaches MVC.

In the end, the Configure method looks like this:

I haven’t really talked about the development exception page middleware that’s present in the beginning of the method (part of the project template), but by now, knowing how all of this works, you can guess what it does - if we’re in development environment, a page with exception details is shown when an unhandled error occurs, when not in development, this information is not shown.

ConfigureServices method

Taking a look at the other method present in the Startup class, we have ConfigureServices. As we talked about, ConfigureServices is where we register our applications dependencies, so they can be injected where needed. Until now we only had registered the MVC dependencies, now let’s add a dependency for our own usage.

In the root of the project, I’m adding a a new folder Demo and in there creating 2 files: IGroupIdGenerator and GroupIdGenerator - you can guess that the first will be an interface and the second a class that implements the former.

Pretty simple stuff, just to have something to inject 😛 The interface has a single method, to retrieve the next id. The implementation stores the last used id in an instance field, which is incremented in every method call.

To use this id generator, we head to the GroupsController, remove the currentGroupId field we had there and inject - as in receive as a constructor argument - the newly created IGroupIdGenerator, storing it in an instance variable.

Now we can use the id generator on the action responsible for creating a new group, instead of the id field we had previously.

Even though if we compile and run right now, it seems to work correctly, as soon as we make a request to our groups controller, we get the following error:

An unhandled exception occurred while processing the request.

InvalidOperationException: Unable to resolve service for type 'CodingMilitia.PlayBall.GroupManagement.Web.Demo.IGroupIdGenerator' while attempting to activate 'CodingMilitia.PlayBall.GroupManagement.Web.Controllers.GroupsController'.

That’s because we prepared everything, but didn’t register the group id generator in the dependency injection container. When registering a service in the container, one decision we need to make is what’s the life cycle of the instances created by the DI container:

  • Transient - every time a dependency on the registered service is needed, a new instance is created
  • Scoped - every time a dependency on the registered service is needed in a request, the same instance is used, but across different requests the instance is different
  • Singleton - every time a dependency on the registered service is needed, the same instance is used

The life cycle will always depend on the service we’re registering. In our case, given that we’re storing the last generated id in an instance field of GroupIdGenerator, and we want it to last at least as long as the application is running (given we don’t have persistence yet), we’ll use a singleton.

Our ConfigureServices end result will be as follows:

Now if we run it, it works as it was working before, just with a different way to getting the next id when creating a new group.

Outro

These are the basics of the Program and Startup classes. There’s of course much more that can be said and done, but I feel this is enough as an intro as we prepare to go a little bit deeper in the next episodes.

The source code for this post is here.

Please send any feedback you have, so the next posts/videos can be better and even adjusted to more interesting topics.

Thanks for stopping by, cyaz!

Discussion

pic
Editor guide
Collapse
jeikabu profile image
jeikabu

I've got things mostly working with host containers but sometimes something doesn't work when I think it should. So, I enjoy reading posts on ASP.NET Core.
You reminded me that I definitely don't "get" middleware yet.

Collapse
joaofbantunes profile image
João Antunes Author

I have a post planned to go a bit deeper on middlewares, but when I deliver it, you probably already read about it and understand it 🙂

Collapse
dyagzy profile image
dyagzy

Thanks for this post.

Let me ask a question based on this current episode before I read the other episodes(I know their will be changes).

  1. What happens when you have more than one interface (IGroupIDGenerator) and more than one Class implementation(GroupIdGenerator) how do you register them in the IOC container?

2.Do you have to register all the interface in your project with the IOC?

  1. What determines which interface to be registered with the IOC how do I know when to register it?

**
My apologies if my questions sounds foolish (am still a beginner and this whole concept is still alien to me).

Collapse
joaofbantunes profile image
João Antunes Author

Let me try to go through each point:

  1. Having multiple implementations of the same interface in the container is possible, and two approaches come to mind:
    • You really want to use the multiple ones individually, instead of receiving a single one in your class that depends on it, you receive an IEnumerable<IInterface>
    • You actually want just one instance. In this case other implementations could be decorators (I show an example of this in the 005 post) or maybe you want a different implementation depending on the receiver. In this latter case, I don't think you can do it with the default DI container of ASP.NET Core without some extra tricks.
  2. (and I think 3 as well) You just need to register the interfaces (and implementations) that you want to get automatically injected in your other classes. If you have some interfaces whose implementations you instantiate manually, those ones don't need to be registered.
    • As an example, you could have multiple domain classes that represent the result of an operation, and implement an interface with a method that should return a string with its details. Such interface and implementations shouldn't be registered, they're not services that we'd like to abstract the calling code from, but just a way to normalize how to perform an operation with a specific set of classes.

No need for apologies, that's the goal of these posts, I'm glad if they're helpful for people to learn something new.

Hope these answers help, if not, let me know what's still missing, so I can try to improve them 🙂

Collapse
vekzdran profile image
Vedran Mandić

Seems like gists are buggy on dev.to or you have misplaced them in this post? Good series.

Collapse
joaofbantunes profile image
João Antunes Author

Thanks for the heads-up!
Probably a bug, as it looked ok in the post's source, but saving again seems to have fixed it.