Jens Schauder is software developer since 1997. He loves software development for the constant challenges and constantly changing environment. A great chance to learn and teach. He is also blogger, author of various articles and speaker at conferences. Jens is a DZone MVB and is not an employee of DZone and has posted 84 posts at DZone. You can read more from them at their website. View Full User Profile

Breaking Dependency Cycles

  • submit to reddit

If you look into rules for good software design you’ll probably come around the notion that dependency circles(1) are bad. From my interview experience I’d say that many of the more experienced developers know that rule. And almost everybody agrees to that rule when asked. (Of course that might be due to the way I phrase the question. Some people say I can be pretty … convincing).

Anyway the logical next question is: How do you break circular dependencies? I find it a little disturbing that few developers can answer this question. So I’ll try to fix that.

Imagine two classes(2), forming a dependency circle. A depends on B and B depends on A. How do you break that circle, without changing the functionality? To be more precise: we are talking about the compile/deploy time dependency. At runtime the two classes need each others, so there actually will be a circular dependency.

Got it? It’s actually not that difficult: Extract all functionality of B into an interface C. Let A depend on C, B implements C and still depends on A. Circle broken.

Actually there is a piece missing. As said, at runtime we do need the circular dependency. At runtime A needs to reference an actual B. So you need a third class D which knows A and B and plugs the B into the A (using the C shaped hole).

Problem solved.

Actually this has a well known name: Dependency Injection. It should be quite easily doable without any framework in your main language.

Note (1): Larger circles are worse than smaller ones. Circles between classes of a single package are kind of ok. Circles between packages are pretty ugly. Circles between Jars are a no go and actually will break many tool chains.

Note (2): If you prefer you can replace the term ‘class’ with package or jar. In that sense a package implements another one, when it implements interfaces in that package.



Published at DZone with permission of Jens Schauder, author and DZone MVB.

(Note: Opinions expressed in this article and its replies are the opinions of their respective authors and not those of DZone, Inc.)


Jilles Van Gurp replied on Tue, 2011/07/19 - 1:12am

I don't really mind cycles inside a package but cyclical dependencies between packages are a definite no-go. I have a jdepend based unit test at work to detect cycles. It has broken our builds on several occasions due to it correctly detecting a dependency that I inadvertedly introduced. Really useful to have that around because these cyclical dependencies are quite hard to spot.

César Almeida replied on Fri, 2011/07/29 - 9:16am


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.