Should I take ILogger, ILogger<T>, ILoggerFactory or ILoggerProvider for a library?
Solution 1:
Definition
We have 3 interfaces: ILogger
, ILoggerProvider
and ILoggerFactory
. Let's look at the source code to find out their responsibilities:
ILogger: is responsible to write a log message of a given Log Level.
ILoggerProvider: is responsible to create an instance of ILogger
(you are not supposed to use ILoggerProvider
directly to create a logger)
ILoggerFactory: you can register one or more ILoggerProvider
s with the factory, which in turn uses all of them to create an instance of ILogger
. ILoggerFactory
holds a collection of ILoggerProviders
.
In the example below, we are registering 2 providers (console and file) with the factory. When we create a logger, the factory uses both of these providers to create an instance of Logger
:
ILoggerFactory factory = new LoggerFactory().AddConsole(); // add console provider
factory.AddProvider(new LoggerFileProvider("c:\\log.txt")); // add file provider
Logger logger = factory.CreateLogger(); // <-- creates a console logger and a file logger
So the logger itself, is maintaining a collection of ILogger
s, and it writes the log message to all of them. Looking at Logger source code we can confirm that Logger
has an array of ILoggers
(i.e. LoggerInformation[]
), and at the same time it is implementing ILogger
interface.
Dependency Injection
MS documentation provides 2 methods for injecting a logger:
1. Injecting the factory:
public TodoController(ITodoRepository todoRepository, ILoggerFactory logger) { _todoRepository = todoRepository; _logger = logger.CreateLogger("TodoApi.Controllers.TodoController"); }
creates a Logger with Category = TodoApi.Controllers.TodoController.
2. Injecting a generic
ILogger<T>
:public TodoController(ITodoRepository todoRepository, ILogger<TodoController> logger) { _todoRepository = todoRepository; _logger = logger; }
creates a logger with Category = fully qualified type name of TodoController
In my opinion, what makes the documentation confusing is that it does not mention anything about injecting a non-generic, ILogger
. In the same example above, we are injecting a non-generic ITodoRepository
and yet, it does not explain why we are not doing the same for ILogger
.
According to Mark Seemann:
An Injection Constructor should do no more than receiving the dependencies.
Injecting a factory into the Controller is not a good approach, because it is not Controller's responsibility to initialize the Logger (violation of SRP). At the same time injecting a generic ILogger<T>
adds unnecessary noise. See Simple Injector's blog for more details: What’s wrong with the ASP.NET Core DI abstraction?
What should be injected (at least according to the article above) is a non-generic ILogger
, but then, that's not something that Microsoft's Built-in DI Container can do, and you need to use a 3rd party DI Library. These two documents explain how you can use 3rd party libraries with .NET Core.
This is another article by Nikola Malovic, in which he explains his 5 laws of IoC.
Nikola’s 4th law of IoC
Every constructor of a class being resolved should not have any implementation other than accepting a set of its own dependencies.
Solution 2:
Those are all valid except for ILoggerProvider
. ILogger
and ILogger<T>
are what you're supposed to use for logging. To get an ILogger
, you use an ILoggerFactory
. ILogger<T>
is a shortcut to get a logger for a particular category (shortcut for the type as the category).
When you use the ILogger
to perform logging, each registered ILoggerProvider
gets a chance to handle that log message. It's not really valid for consuming code to call into the ILoggerProvider
directly.
Solution 3:
The ILogger<T>
was the actual one that is made for DI. The ILogger<T>
came in order to help implement the factory pattern much more easily, instead of you writing on your own all the DI and Factory logic, that was one of the smartest decisions in ASP.NET Core
You can choose between:
ILogger<T>
if you have a need to use factory and DI patterns in your code or you could use the ILogger
, to implement simple logging with no DI needed.
Given that, the ILoggerProvider
is just a bridge to handle each of the registered log's messages. There is no need to use it, as it does not effect anything that you should intervene in code. It listens to the registered ILoggerProvider
and handles the messages. That's about it.