golang-dependency-injection

作成者: samber

Go言語における依存性注入(DI)の包括的ガイド。DIが重要である理由(テスト容易性、疎結合、関心事の分離、ライフサイクル管理)、手動コンストラクタインジェクション、DIライブラリの比較(google/wire、uber-go/dig、uber-go/fx、samber/do)をカバー。このスキルは、サービスアーキテクチャの設計、依存性注入の設定、密結合コードのリファクタリング、シングルトンやサービスファクトリの管理、またはユーザーが制御の反転やサービスについて質問した際に使用します。

npx skills add https://github.com/samber/cc-skills-golang --skill golang-dependency-injection

Persona: You are a Go software architect. You guide teams toward testable, loosely coupled designs — you choose the simplest DI approach that solves the problem, and you never over-engineer.

Orchestration mode: Use ultracode when refactoring a large coupled codebase toward dependency injection — orchestrate the three sub-agents described in Refactor mode (global/init discovery, concrete-dependency mapping, service-locator detection) and consolidate into one migration plan.

Modes:

  • Design mode (new project, new service, or adding a service to an existing DI setup): assess the existing dependency graph and lifecycle needs; recommend manual injection or a library from the decision table; then generate the wiring code.
  • Refactor mode (existing coupled code): use up to 3 parallel sub-agents — Agent 1 identifies global variables and init() service setup, Agent 2 maps concrete type dependencies that should become interfaces, Agent 3 locates service-locator anti-patterns (container passed as argument) — then consolidate findings and propose a migration plan.

Community default. A company skill that explicitly supersedes samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-dependency-injection skill takes precedence.

Dependency Injection in Go

Dependency injection (DI) means passing dependencies to a component rather than having it create or find them. In Go, this is how you build testable, loosely coupled applications — your services declare what they need, and the caller (or container) provides it.

This skill is not exhaustive. When using a DI library (google/wire, uber-go/dig, uber-go/fx, samber/do), refer to the library's official documentation and code examples for current API signatures.

For interface-based design foundations (accept interfaces, return structs), see the samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-structs-interfaces skill.

Best Practices Summary

  1. Dependencies MUST be injected via constructors — NEVER use global variables or init() for service setup
  2. Small projects (< 10 services) SHOULD use manual constructor injection — no library needed
  3. Interfaces MUST be defined where consumed, not where implemented — accept interfaces, return structs
  4. NEVER use global registries or package-level service locators
  5. The DI container MUST only exist at the composition root (main() or app startup) — NEVER pass the container as a dependency
  6. Prefer lazy initialization — only create services when first requested
  7. Use singletons for stateful services (DB connections, caches) and transients for stateless ones
  8. Mock at the interface boundary — DI makes this trivial
  9. Keep the dependency graph shallow — deep chains signal design problems
  10. Choose the right DI library for your project size and team — see the decision table below

Why Dependency Injection?

Problem without DIHow DI solves it
Functions create their own dependenciesDependencies are injected — swap implementations freely
Testing requires real databases, APIsPass mock implementations in tests
Changing one component breaks othersLoose coupling via interfaces — components don't know each other's internals
Services initialized everywhereCentralized container manages lifecycle (singleton, factory, lazy)
All services loaded at startupLazy loading — services created only when first requested
Global state and init() functionsExplicit wiring at startup — predictable, debuggable

DI shines in applications with many interconnected services — HTTP servers, microservices, CLI tools with plugins. For a small script with 2-3 functions, manual wiring is fine. Don't over-engineer.

Manual Constructor Injection (No Library)

For small projects, pass dependencies through constructors. See Manual DI examples for a complete application example.

// ✓ Good — explicit dependencies, testable
type UserService struct {
    db     UserStore
    mailer Mailer
    logger *slog.Logger
}

func NewUserService(db UserStore, mailer Mailer, logger *slog.Logger) *UserService {
    return &UserService{db: db, mailer: mailer, logger: logger}
}

// main.go — manual wiring
func main() {
    logger := slog.Default()
    db := postgres.NewUserStore(connStr)
    mailer := smtp.NewMailer(smtpAddr)
    userSvc := NewUserService(db, mailer, logger)
    orderSvc := NewOrderService(db, logger)
    api := NewAPI(userSvc, orderSvc, logger)
    api.ListenAndServe(":8080")
}
// ✗ Bad — hardcoded dependencies, untestable
type UserService struct {
    db *sql.DB
}

func NewUserService() *UserService {
    db, _ := sql.Open("postgres", os.Getenv("DATABASE_URL")) // hidden dependency
    return &UserService{db: db}
}

Manual DI breaks down when:

  • You have 15+ services with cross-dependencies
  • You need lifecycle management (health checks, graceful shutdown)
  • You want lazy initialization or scoped containers
  • Wiring order becomes fragile and hard to maintain

DI Library Comparison

Go has three main approaches to DI libraries:

Decision Table

CriteriaManualgoogle/wireuber-go/dig + fxsamber/do
Project sizeSmall (< 10 services)Medium-LargeLargeAny size
Type safetyCompile-timeCompile-time (codegen)Runtime (reflection)Compile-time (generics)
Code generationNoneRequired (wire_gen.go)NoneNone
ReflectionNoneNoneYesNone
API styleN/AProvider sets + build tagsStruct tags + decoratorsSimple, generic functions
Lazy loadingManualN/A (all eager)Built-in (fx)Built-in
SingletonsManualBuilt-inBuilt-inBuilt-in
Transient/factoryManualManualBuilt-inBuilt-in
Scopes/modulesManualProvider setsModule system (fx)Built-in (hierarchical)
Health checksManualManualManualBuilt-in interface
Graceful shutdownManualManualBuilt-in (fx)Built-in interface
Container cloningN/AN/AN/ABuilt-in
DebuggingPrint statementsCompile errorsfx.Visualize()ExplainInjector(), web interface
Go versionAnyAnyAny1.18+ (generics)
Learning curveNoneMediumHighLow

Quick Comparison: Same App, Four Ways

The dependency graph: Config -> Database -> UserStore -> UserService -> API

Manual:

cfg := NewConfig()
db := NewDatabase(cfg)
store := NewUserStore(db)
svc := NewUserService(store)
api := NewAPI(svc)
api.Run()
// No automatic shutdown, health checks, or lazy loading

google/wire:

// wire.go — then run: wire ./...
func InitializeAPI() (*API, error) {
    wire.Build(NewConfig, NewDatabase, NewUserStore, NewUserService, NewAPI)
    return nil, nil
}
// No lifecycle hooks (OnStart/OnStop) or health checks; cleanup via returned func() from providers

uber-go/fx:

app := fx.New(
    fx.Provide(NewConfig, NewDatabase, NewUserStore, NewUserService),
    fx.Invoke(func(api *API) { api.Run() }),
)
app.Run() // manages lifecycle, but reflection-based

samber/do:

i := do.New()
do.Provide(i, NewConfig)
do.Provide(i, NewDatabase)    // auto shutdown + health check
do.Provide(i, NewUserStore)
do.Provide(i, NewUserService)
api := do.MustInvoke[*API](i)
api.Run()
// defer i.Shutdown() — handles all cleanup automatically

Testing with DI

DI makes testing straightforward — inject mocks instead of real implementations:

// Define a mock
type MockUserStore struct {
    users map[string]*User
}

func (m *MockUserStore) FindByID(ctx context.Context, id string) (*User, error) {
    u, ok := m.users[id]
    if !ok {
        return nil, ErrNotFound
    }
    return u, nil
}

// Test with manual injection
func TestUserService_GetUser(t *testing.T) {
    mock := &MockUserStore{
        users: map[string]*User{"1": {ID: "1", Name: "Alice"}},
    }
    svc := NewUserService(mock, nil, slog.Default())

    user, err := svc.GetUser(context.Background(), "1")
    if err != nil {
        t.Fatalf("unexpected error: %v", err)
    }
    if user.Name != "Alice" {
        t.Errorf("got %q, want %q", user.Name, "Alice")
    }
}

Testing with samber/do — Clone and Override

Container cloning creates an isolated copy where you override only the services you need to mock:

func TestUserService_WithDo(t *testing.T) {
    // Create a test injector with mock implementation
    testInjector := do.New()

    // Provide the mock UserStore interface
    do.OverrideValue[UserStore](testInjector, &MockUserStore{
        users: map[string]*User{"1": {ID: "1", Name: "Alice"}},
    })

    // Provide other real services as needed
    do.Provide[*slog.Logger](testInjector, func(i *do.Injector) (*slog.Logger, error) {
        return slog.Default(), nil
    })

    svc := do.MustInvoke[*UserService](testInjector)
    user, err := svc.GetUser(context.Background(), "1")
    // ... assertions
}

This is particularly useful for integration tests where you want most services to be real but need to mock a specific boundary (database, external API, mailer).

When to Adopt a DI Library

SignalAction
< 10 services, simple dependenciesStay with manual constructor injection
10-20 services, some cross-cutting concernsConsider a DI library
20+ services, lifecycle management neededStrongly recommended
Need health checks, graceful shutdownUse a library with built-in lifecycle support
Team unfamiliar with DI conceptsStart manual, migrate incrementally

Common Mistakes

MistakeFix
Global variables as dependenciesPass through constructors or DI container
init() for service setupExplicit initialization in main() or container
Depending on concrete typesAccept interfaces at consumption boundaries
Passing the container everywhere (service locator)Inject specific dependencies, not the container
Deep dependency chains (A->B->C->D->E)Flatten — most services should depend on repositories and config directly
Creating a new container per requestOne container per application; use scopes for request-level isolation

Cross-References

  • → See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-samber-do skill for detailed samber/do usage patterns
  • → See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-structs-interfaces skill for interface design and composition
  • → See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-testing skill for testing with dependency injection
  • → See samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-project-layout skill for DI initialization placement

References

samberのその他のスキル

golang-code-style
samber
We need to translate the given text from English to Japanese, preserving the name "golang-code-style" and other technical terms. The instruction says: "Translate only the text inside <text>. Do not include the name unless it appears in the source text." The name "golang-code-style" appears in the source text? Actually, the source text does not contain the name "golang-code-style" explicitly. The name is given in the context: "Name to preserve: golang-code-style". But the instruction says "Do not include the name unless it appears in the source text." Since it does not appear in the source text, we should not add it. However, the source text contains references like "samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-naming" etc. Those should be preserved as is. We need to translate the description of the skill. The text describes conventions for Go code style. We'll translate into natural Japanese, keeping technical terms like "Go", "linter", "doc comments" etc. Also preserve the arrows and references. Let's break
developmentcode-review
golang-testing
samber
We need to translate the given text from English to Japanese, preserving the name "golang-testing" if it appears. The text is a description of a directory item type "agent skill". The instruction says: "Do not include the name unless it appears in the source text." The name "golang-testing" does not appear in the provided <text>? Actually, looking at the text: it starts with "Production-ready Golang tests — ..." and later mentions "samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-stretchr-testify". The name "golang-testing" is not in the text. So we should not add it. We just translate the content. We need to preserve product names, protocol names, URLs, numbers, technical terms. So "Golang", "testify", "goleak", "CI", "Go", "samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-stretchr-testify" should remain as is. Also "table-driven tests", "testify suites and mocks", "parallel tests", "f
developmenttestingcode-review
golang-design-patterns
samber
慣用的なGo言語のデザインパターン — 関数型オプション、コンストラクタ、エラーフローとカスケード、リソース管理とライフサイクル、グレースフルシャットダウン、耐障害性、アーキテクチャ、依存性注入、データ処理、ストリーミングなど。アーキテクチャパターンを明示的に選択する際、関数型オプションを実装する際、コンストラクタAPIを設計する際、グレースフルシャットダウンを設定する際、耐障害性パターンを適用する際、または特定の問題に適合する慣用的なGoパターンを尋ねる際に適用します。
developmentdesigncode-review
golang-error-handling
samber
We need to translate the given English text into Japanese, preserving the name "golang-error-handling" if it appears, but it does not appear in the text. The text is a description of a skill for idiomatic Go error handling. We must not add any extra commentary, labels, or formatting. Just the translation. The text includes technical terms: "Idiomatic Golang error handling", "creation", "wrapping with %w", "errors.Is/As", "errors.Join", "custom error types", "sentinel errors", "panic/recover", "single handling rule", "structured logging with slog", "HTTP request logging middleware", "samber/oops for production errors", "log aggregation 3rd-party tools", "Go code", "samber/cc-skills-golang@golang-samber-oops". These should be preserved as is or translated appropriately. For example, "Idiomatic Golang error handling" can be translated as "慣用的なGoのエラーハンドリング". But we need to keep technical terms like "errors
developmentcode-review
golang-performance
samber
Golangのパフォーマンス最適化パターンと方法論 - XのボトルネックがあればYを適用。アロケーション削減、CPU効率、メモリレイアウト、GCチューニング、プーリング、キャッシング、ホットパス最適化をカバー。プロファイリングやベンチマークでボトルネックが特定され、それを修正するための適切な最適化パターンが必要な場合に使用。また、パフォーマンスコードレビューを行い、改善点や迅速なパフォーマンス向上を特定するのに役立つベンチマークを提案する場合にも使用。測定方法論には使用しない(→...)
developmentcode-review
golang-security
samber
Golangのセキュリティベストプラクティスと脆弱性防止。インジェクション(SQL、コマンド、XSS)、暗号化、ファイルシステムの安全性、ネットワークセキュリティ、クッキー、シークレット管理、メモリ安全性、ログ記録をカバー。Goコードのセキュリティに関する作成、レビュー、監査時、または暗号、I/O、シークレット管理、ユーザー入力処理、認証を含むリスクのあるコードに取り組む際に適用。セキュリティツールの設定を含む。
securitycode-reviewdevelopment
golang-database
samber
Goデータベースアクセスの包括的ガイド — パラメータ化クエリ、構造体スキャン、NULL許容カラム、トランザクション、分離レベル、SELECT FOR UPDATE、コネクションプール、バッチ処理、コンテキスト伝搬、マイグレーションツール。PostgreSQL、MariaDB、MySQL、SQLiteと連携するGolangコードの作成、レビュー、デバッグ時、データベーステスト時、またはdatabase/sql、sqlx、pgxに関する質問時に使用します。データベーススキーマやマイグレーションSQLは生成しません。
developmentdatabase
golang-lint
samber
GolangプロジェクトにおけるLintのベストプラクティスとgolangci-lintの設定 — リンターの実行、.golangci.ymlの設定、nolintディレクティブによる警告の抑制、Lint出力の解釈、リンターの選択。golangci-lintの設定時、Lint警告やnolint抑制について質問がある時、コード品質ツールのセットアップ時、またはリンターを選択する時に使用します。また、ユーザーがgolangci-lint、go vet、staticcheck、reviveに言及した場合にも使用します。
developmentcode-reviewtesting