In Scala it's bad practice to use implicit parameters for summoning traits that aren't type classes. Not all traits required via implicit parameters are type classes, usage via "implicit" isn't what defines a type class, the trait's signature is. Stop using "implicit" for DI.
-
-
It's quite subjective to call dependency injection with implicits "use" or "abuse", but their design was always to model "context". I think DI fits most definitions of "context".
-
It might be harder to know what all possible readers of some source code might consider part of the context in which they should read it, I don't think the fact it's harder is a good argument for compromising the code's readability by making everything explicit.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
