Would be nice to have built-in decorators, but not a fan of this implementation, which forces having a setDecorated method. I'm not sure if this is possible, but what if we had this instead?

#[Decorates(Repository::class)]
final class CacheRepository implements Repository
{
    public function __construct(
        private readonly Repository $repository, // container knows to inject the original one
        private readonly Cache $cache,
    ) {}
}

Tempest would discover this class and register it as a decorator. When resolving Repository, it would detect that there is a decorator for it and resolve the decorator—but during resolution, it would inject the original interface instead of trying to inject the decorated one (that would be an infinite loop otherwise)

Would be nice to have built-in decorators, but not a fan of this implementation, which forces having a setDecorated method. I'm not sure if this is possible, but what if we had this instead?

#[Decorates(Repository::class)]
final class CacheRepository implements Repository
{
    public function __construct(
        private readonly Repository $repository, // container knows to inject the original one
        private readonly Cache $cache,
    ) {}
}

Tempest would discover this class and register it as a decorator. When resolving Repository, it would detect that there is a decorator for it and resolve the decorator—but during resolution, it would inject the original interface instead of trying to inject the decorated one (that would be an infinite loop otherwise)

Yeah, you are right. I changed it to attribute #[Decorator(decorates: Repository::class)]. Avoiding circular dependency was easy because we pass params through all the stack up to autowireObjectDependency method, so we just need to pass it all along.

Here's a first review, but it will need @brendt's approval and review as well

I'm currently working through my backlog and I'll come back to this one as soon as possible (after 2.0)

I like it! Although, #[Decorates] is a better name imo than #[Decorator]. Can we change that? After that I'll do a code review

Very nice! Thanks