Search Results

Search found 30000 results on 1200 pages for '2 way object databinding'.

Page 5/1200 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Customize WPF databinding: How to add custom logic?

    - by Ashwani Mehlem
    Hi, i have a question regarding some complex data-binding. I want to be able to update a grid (which has the property "IsItemsHost" set to true) dynamically whenever a data-binding occurs. To be more specific, i bind the grid to some items and i want to change the number of grid rows depending on these items, add something like a header (one row containing some text), and set the items' Grid.Row and Grid.Column using some custom logic. What is the easiest way to apply such behaviour whenever the bound data is updated? Do i have to use a viewmodel that also contains the header data? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Winforms, databinding, Listbox and textbox

    - by Snake
    Hi dear friends, I have a ListBox (MyListBox) on my screen, and a Textbox (MyTextBox). The ListBox is filled with a List(Of T), which are all custom items. Now I try to do this: The ListBox' datasource is the List(Of T). Now when an Item changes I want the textbox to be updated to a particular property of the selected item in my ListBox. In code this means: Me.MyListBox.DisplayMember = "SelectionName" Me.MyListBox.ValueMember = "Id" MyTextbox.DataBindings.Add(New Binding("Text", Me._listOfItems, "SelectedItem.Comment", True, DataSourceUpdateMode.OnPropertyChanged)) Me.MyListBox.DataSource = Me._listOfItems this does not work. But when I bind to SelectedValue instead of SelectedItem it works perfectly. The _listOfItems is declared as this: Dim _listOfItems As List(Of MyItem) = New List(Of MyItem)() Where MyItem is this: public class MyItem { public string SelectionName { get; set; } public int Id { get; set; } public string Comment { get; set; } } I tried overriding the ToString() in MyItem so that it would use that. But that doesn't work either. Anybody care to give it a try? Thanks! -Snakiej

    Read the article

  • Databinding a StructuredPropertyEditor specific to type and target in Spring(Grails) - Selective app

    - by Colin Harrington
    Using Grails 1.2.2, I'm working on binding a structured property (CC expiration Date) to a java.util.Date but only for specific Domain and Commands objects. I've found the StructuredPropertyEditor interface, but the only way that I've found to register it is to use the PropertyEditorRegistrar and register the editor for the java.util.Date class (much like this example) I don't want all of my dates to use my custom StructuredPropertyEditor. How do I apply the StructuredPropertyEditor selectively to specific targets like certain Command & Domain Classes?

    Read the article

  • Of Datagridviews, databinding, and non validating cell values.

    - by Yanko Hernández Alvarez
    Lets simplify. Lets say I have this class: class T { public string Name { get; set; } public int Age { get; set; } public int height{ get; set; } ... } and I have a DataGridView's DataSource bound to a BindingList <T>, with N columns, each one bound to each property. I need to: Allow the user to enter non validating ages, heights, etc (for instance "aaa") Color the cells with non validating values (red background) Retain the non validating values displayed until the form is closed (I don't want to lose the values entered until the form is closed, so the user has the option to correct the bad cells anytime he wants BEFORE closing the form) Keep the last correct values entered for each cell with non validating values entered. When the form is closed, ditch the non validating values and keep the last correct values entered. Is there any easy way to do this?

    Read the article

  • Databinding multiple tables linq query to gridview?

    - by Curtis White
    My question is how can I display a linq query in a gridview that has data from multiple tables AND allow the user to edit some of the fields or delete the data from a single table? I'd like to do this with either a linqdatasource or a linq query. I'm aware I can set the e.Result to the query on the selecting event. I've also been able to build a custom databound control for displaying the linq relations (parent.child). However, I'm not sure how I can make this work with delete? I'm thinking I may need to handle the delete event with custom code.

    Read the article

  • Write Null/Nothing value with Databinding

    - by clawson
    I have extended a MaskedTextBox component to add some functionality. The text property of the extended MaskedTextBox is bound to a DateTime? property and the format of binding is set to a time format of "HH:mm:ss" (i.e. 24hr time). So that this masked text box will capture the display a time. The extra functionality I have added is to make the component readonly unless the component is double clicked or the enter button is pressed (the back color of the control helps to inform the users if the component is locked/readonly or not). When the enter button is pressed I also suspend the bindings so that bound data is updated the users input won't be lost. The information is then written back to the value and databindings resumed when the user presses the enter key again. This all works fine up to here, with values written and displayed as would be expected. However, I also want to write the null or nothing value to the DateTime? property if the user hasn't entered any text (or invalid text but let's just stick with no text) when enter key is pressed to submit the new value. Unlike with other valid entries in the MaskedTextBox, with no text entered when i execute: Me.DataBindings("Text").WriteValue() (when 'locking' the MaskedTextBox) it then branches to the bound properties Get method as I step into each line of code in the debugger (as opposed to the Set method with other valid entries) How can I write this null/nothing/"" value to the DateTime? property when no text "" is entered into the MaskedTextBox? Thanks for the help!

    Read the article

  • ComboBox WPF Databinding to a DataView

    - by Oleg
    Hello Everyone! Lets say I have one ComboBox and 2 TextBox items on my GUI. And I have one DataView with data (City, PostalCode, Street, ID). While initializing the whole thing I fill my DataView with some data :) City 1, 11111, Street 1, 1 City 1, 22222, Street 2, 2 City 1, 33333, Street 3, 3 Now I want to bind this to my ComboBox. DataView is a Class Member called "m_dvAdresses", but this code doesnt help: ItemsSource="{Binding Source=m_dvAdresses}" SelectedValuePath="ID" DisplayMemberPath="Street" Also I want to have my 2 ComboBox items to show PostalCode and City, depending on what to i pick in my ComboBox. Like if I pick "Street 2", TextBox1 show me "City 1" and TexBox2 show me "22222"... How can I bind all of them ONLY in the WPF code? Thanks for help!!!!!!!!!!! :)

    Read the article

  • Bug with DataBinding in WPF Host in Winforms?

    - by Tigraine
    Hi Guys, I've spent far too much time with this and can't find the mistake. Maybe I'm missing something very obvious or I may have just found a bug in the WPF Element Host for Winforms. I am binding a ListView to a ObeservableList that lives on my ProductListViewModel. I'm trying to implement searching for the ListView with the general Idea to just change the ObservableList with a new list that is filtered. Anyway, the ListView Binding code looks like this: <ListView ItemsSource="{Binding Path=Products}" SelectedItem="{Binding Path=SelectedItem}" SelectionMode="Single"> <ListView.ItemContainerStyle> <Style TargetType="{x:Type ListViewItem}"> <Setter Property="IsSelected" Value="{Binding IsSelected, Mode=TwoWay}"></Setter> </Style> </ListView.ItemContainerStyle> <ListView.ItemTemplate> <DataTemplate> <TextBlock Text="{Binding Name}"></TextBlock> </DataTemplate> </ListView.ItemTemplate> </ListView> And the ViewModel code is as vanilla as it can get: private ObservableCollection<ProductViewModel> products; public ObservableCollection<ProductViewModel> Products { get { return products; } private set { if (products != value) { products = value; OnPropertyChanged("Products"); } } } Now the problem here: Once I debug into my OnPropertyChanged method, I can see that there are no subscribers to the PropertyChanged event (it's null), so nothing happens on the UI.. I already tried Mode=TwoWay and other Binding modes, it seems I can't get the ListView to subscribe to the ItemsSource... Can anyone help me with this? I'm just about to forget about the ElemenHost and just do it in Winforms greetings Daniel

    Read the article

  • Databinding expression for retrieving value of related collection using LINQ

    - by joshb
    I have a GridView that is bound to a LINQDataSource control that is returning a collection of customers. Within my DataGrid I need to display the home phone number of a customer, if they have one. The phone numbers of a customer are stored in a separate table with a foreign key pointing to the customer table. The following binding expression gets me the first phone number for a customer: <asp:TemplateField HeaderText="LastName" SortExpression="LastName"> <ItemTemplate> <asp:Label ID="PhoneLabel" runat="server" Text='<%# Eval("Phones[0].PhoneNumber") %>'></asp:Label> </ItemTemplate> </asp:TemplateField> I need to figure out how to get the home phone number specifically (filter based on phone type) and handle the scenario where the customer does not have a home phone in the database. Right now it's throwing an out of range exception if the customer does not have any phone numbers. I've tried using the Where operator with a lambda expression to filter the phone type but it doesn't work: <%# Eval("Phones.Where(p => p.PhoneTypeId == 2).PhoneNumber") %> Solutions or links to any good articles on the subject would be much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • MVVM and Databinding with UniformGrid

    - by JP
    I'm trying to style the back of a WPF chart with some rectangles. I'm using MVVM, and I need the rectangles to be uniformly sized. When defined via Xaml, this works with a fixed "BucketCount" of 4: <VisualBrush> <VisualBrush.Visual> <UniformGrid Height="500" Width="500" Rows="1" Columns="{Binding BucketCount}"> <Rectangle Grid.Row="0" Grid.Column="0" Fill="#22ADD8E6" /> <Rectangle Grid.Row="0" Grid.Column="1" Fill="#22D3D3D3"/> <Rectangle Grid.Row="0" Grid.Column="2" Fill="#22ADD8E6"/> <Rectangle Grid.Row="0" Grid.Column="3" Fill="#22D3D3D3"/> </UniformGrid> </VisualBrush.Visual> <VisualBrush> How can I bind my ObservableCollection of Rectangles? There is no "ItemsSource" property on UniformGrid. Do I need to use an ItemsControl? If so, how can I do this? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • WPF: Problem with TreeView databinding

    - by Am
    Hi, I have a tree view defined as follows: <TreeView Grid.Row="0" Grid.Column="0" Margin="0" FlowDirection="LeftToRight" ItemTemplate="{StaticResource NavigationHeaderTemplate}" Name="TreeView2"> </TreeView> The data binding is: public class ViewTag : INotifyPropertyChanged { private string _tagName; public string TagName { get { return _tagName; } set { _tagName = value; PropertyChanged(this, new PropertyChangedEventArgs("Tag Name")); } } private ObservableCollection<ViewTag> _childTags; public ObservableCollection<ViewTag> ChildTags { get { return _childTags; } set { _childTags = value; OnPropertyChanged(new PropertyChangedEventArgs("Child Tags")); } } #region INotifyPropertyChanged Members public event PropertyChangedEventHandler PropertyChanged; public void OnPropertyChanged(PropertyChangedEventArgs e) { if (PropertyChanged != null) PropertyChanged(this, e); } #endregion public ViewTag(string tagName, ObservableCollection<ViewTag> childTags) { _tagName = tagName; _childTags = childTags; } } And my test binding is: List<ViewTag> tempTags = new List<ViewTag>(); ViewTag t1, t2, t3, t4, t5, t6; t1 = new ViewTag("Computers", null); t2 = new ViewTag("Chemistry", null); t3 = new ViewTag("Physics", null); var t123 = new ObservableCollection<ViewTag>(); t123.Add(t1); t123.Add(t2); t123.Add(t3); t4 = new ViewTag("Science", t123); var t1234 = new ObservableCollection<ViewTag>(); t1234.Add(t4); t5 = new ViewTag("All Items", t1234); t6 = new ViewTag("Untagged", null); var tall = new ObservableCollection<ViewTag>(); tall.Add(t5); tall.Add(t6); xy.Add(new ViewNavigationTree() { Header = "Tags", Image = "img/tags2.ico", Children = tall }); var rootFolders = eDataAccessLayer.RepositoryFacrory.Instance.MonitoredDirectoriesRepository.Directories.ToList(); var viewFolders = new ObservableCollection<ViewTag>(); foreach (var vf in rootFolders) { viewFolders.Add(new ViewTag(vf.FullPath, null)); } xy.Add(new ViewNavigationTree() { Header = "Folders", Image = "img/folder_16x16.png", Children = viewFolders }); xy.Add(new ViewNavigationTree() { Header = "Authors", Image = "img/user_16x16.png", Children = null }); xy.Add(new ViewNavigationTree() { Header = "Publishers", Image = "img/powerplant_32.png", Children = null }); TreeView2.ItemsSource = xy; Problem is, the tree only shows: + Tags All Items Untagged + Folders dir 1 dir 2 ... Authors Publishers The items I added under "All Items" aren't displayed. Being a WPF nub, i can't put my finger on the problem. Any help will be greatly appriciated.

    Read the article

  • Databinding and Lists in instances of classes

    - by Younes
    I have initialised an instance of a class i have called "Relation" this class also contains a list of "Bills". When i databind this information to a grid, the Relations are showing, tho the Bills ain't. The Relation information is returning in a List and the Bills are inside. Relation cRelation = new Relation(); List<tRelation> relationList = cRelation.getRelations(); a relation has: relation.Bills <== List<tBills>; How to make sure that the list inside the list is also getting showed in the Datagrid?

    Read the article

  • Why the databinding fails in ListView (WPF) ?

    - by Ashish Ashu
    I have a ListView of which ItemSource is set to my Custom Collection. I have defined a GridView CellTemplate that contains a combo box as below : <ListView MaxWidth="850" Grid.Row="1" SelectedItem="{Binding Path = SelectedCondition}" ItemsSource="{Binding Path = Conditions}" FontWeight="Normal" FontSize="11" Name="listview"> <ListView.View> <GridView> <GridViewColumn Width="175" Header="Type"> <GridViewColumn.CellTemplate> <DataTemplate> <ComboBox Style="{x:Null}" x:Name="TypeCmbox" Height="Auto" Width="150" SelectedValuePath="Key" DisplayMemberPath="Value" SelectedItem="{Binding Path = MyType}" ItemsSource="{Binding Path = MyTypes}" HorizontalAlignment="Center" /> </DataTemplate> </GridViewColumn.CellTemplate> </GridViewColumn> </ListView> My Custom collection is the ObservableCollection. I have a two buttons - Move Up and Move Down on top of the listview control . When user clicks on the Move Up or Move Down button I call MoveUp and MoveDown methods of Observable Collection. But when I Move Up and Move Down the rows then the Selected Index of a combo box is -1. I have ensured that selectedItem is not equal to null when performing Move Up and Move Down commands. Please Help!!

    Read the article

  • ASP.Net databinding in tag

    - by Psytronic
    I know you can bind in the code-behind, but I don't quite understand how it works if you want to declare it within the controls tag. This is for a custom collection. I thought it was just Datasource="<%# MyCollection %" Where MyCollection is an exposed property of the class in the code behind? MyCollection{ get{ return _MyCollection;}} Something like that. But it doesn't seem to work that way, so can I not bind this way, or am I missing something?

    Read the article

  • WPF Databinding and Styling based on Data in an item in an IList

    - by Nate Bross
    I have a ListBox bound to a list of Items (for arguement, lets say its got a string and two dates Entered and Done). I would like to make the background color of items in the ListBox have a gray color if the Done DateTime is != DateTime.MinValue. Edit: Should I make a converter? and convert DateTime to a Brush based on the value of the DateTime? Is something like this my best option? or is there a simple Xaml snippet I could use? [ValueConversion(typeof(DateTime), typeof(Brush))] class MyConverter : IValueConverter { ... }

    Read the article

  • PHP Object References in Frameworks

    - by bigstylee
    Before I dive into the disscusion part a quick question; Is there a method to determine if a variable is a reference to another variable/object? For example $foo = 'Hello World'; $bar = &$foo; echo (is_reference($bar) ? 'Is reference' : 'Is orginal'; I have been using PHP5 for a few years now (personal use only) and I would say I am moderately reversed on the topic of Object Orientated implementation. However the concept of Model View Controller Framework is fairly new to me. I have looked a number of tutorials and looked at some of the open source frameworks (mainly CodeIgnitor) to get a better understanding how everything fits together. I am starting to appreciate the real benefits of using this type of structure. I am used to implementing object referencing in the following technique. class Foo{ public $var = 'Hello World!'; } class Bar{ public function __construct(){ global $Foo; echo $Foo->var; } } $Foo = new Foo; $Bar = new Bar; I was surprised to see that CodeIgnitor and Yii pass referencs of objects and can be accessed via the following method: $this->load->view('argument') The immediate advantage I can see is a lot less code and more user friendly. But I do wonder if it is more efficient as these frameworks are presumably optimised? Or simply to make the code more user friendly? This was an interesting article Do not use PHP references.

    Read the article

  • Use a subclass object to modify a protected propety within its superclass object

    - by gadmeer
    Sorry for the crappy title I failed to think of a better version for my Java question. I am right now using Java version: 1.6.0_18 and Netbeans version: 6.8 Now for the question. What I've done is created a class with only one protected int property and next I made a public method to Set the int property to a given value. Then I made an object of that class and used said public method to set the int property to 5. Now I need your help to create another class that will take said object and expose it's protected int property. The way I could think of doing this was to create a sub class to inherit said class and then create a method to Get the int property of the super class. I kind of succeeded to create the code to Get the int property but now I can't figure out how to use this new sub class to reference the object of the super class. Here are the 2 classes I have thus far: public class A { protected int iNumber; public void setNumber ( int aNumber ) { iNumber = aNumber; } } public class B extends A { public int getNumber() { return super.iNumber; } } I created an object of 'A' and used its method to set its property to 5, like this: A objA = new A(); objA.setNumber ( 5 ); Now I want to create an object of 'B' to output the int stored within the property of 'objA'. I've tried to run this code: B objB = (B) objA; String aNumber_String = String.valueOf( objB.getNumber() ); System.out.println( aNumber_String ); but I got the error: "java.lang.ClassCastException" on the first line B objB = (B) objA; Please is there anyway of doing what I am trying to do? P.S. I am hoping to make this idea work because I do not want to edit class A (unless I have no choice) by giving it a getter method. P.P.S Also I know it's a 'bad' idea to expose the property instead of making it private and use public setter / getter methods but I like it this way :). Edit: Added code tags

    Read the article

  • VB.NET - Object reference not set to an instance of an object

    - by Daniel
    I need some help with my program. I get this error when I run my VB.NET program with a custom DayView control. ***** Exception Text ******* System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object. at SeaCow.Main.DayView1_ResolveAppointments(Object sender, ResolveAppointmentsEventArgs args) in C:\Users\Daniel\My Programs\Visual Basic\SeaCow\SeaCow\SeaCow\Main.vb:line 120 at Calendar.DayView.OnResolveAppointments(ResolveAppointmentsEventArgs args) at Calendar.DayView.OnPaint(PaintEventArgs e) at System.Windows.Forms.Control.PaintWithErrorHandling(PaintEventArgs e, Int16 layer) at System.Windows.Forms.Control.WmPaint(Message& m) at System.Windows.Forms.Control.WndProc(Message& m) at System.Windows.Forms.NativeWindow.Callback(IntPtr hWnd, Int32 msg, IntPtr wparam, IntPtr lparam) According to the error code, the 'for each' loop below is causing the NullReferenceException error. At default, the 'appointments' list is assigned to nothing and I can't find where the ResolveAppointments function is being called at. Private Sub DayView1_ResolveAppointments(ByVal sender As Object, ByVal args As Calendar.ResolveAppointmentsEventArgs) Handles DayView1.ResolveAppointments Dim m_Apps As New List(Of Calendar.Appointment) For Each m_App As Calendar.Appointment In appointments If (m_App.StartDate >= args.StartDate) AndAlso (m_App.StartDate <= args.EndDate) Then m_Apps.Add(m_App) End If Next args.Appointments = m_Apps End Sub Anyone have any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Databinding to an Entity Framework in WPF

    - by King Chan
    Is it good to use databinding to Entity Framework's Entity in WPF? I created a singleton entity framework context: To have only one connection and it won't open and close all the time. So I can pass the Entity around to any class, and can modify the Entity and make changes to the database. All ViewModels getting the entity out from the same Context and databinding to the View saves me time from mapping new object, but now I imagine there is problem in not using the newest Context: A ViewModel databinding to a Entity, then someone else updated the data. The ViewModel will still display the old data, because the Context is never being dispose to refresh. I always create new Context and then dispose of it. If I want to pass the Entity around, then there will be conflicts between Context and Entity. What is the suggested way of doing this ?

    Read the article

  • Profile:Object reference not set to an instance of an object

    - by sallalman83
    Hi, i just lunch my web site i used the asp.net routing technology on it, and its work fine in my localhost but when i moved the project to the hosting server(Godaddy.com) its just work fine when there is no virtual sub directories like this(havebreak.com) but when u click on this link (havebreak.com/Registration/) or any other links that contain a virtual sub-directories its give Object reference not set to an instance of an object error on the profile object if (!Profile.IsAnonymous) Line 18: mlvRegistratioin.ActiveViewIndex = 1; i check my IIS settings and found it using the "Integrated pipeline" as recommended (at least at my knowledge), i checked the httpModules and httpHandlers tags under the system.webServer (since my hosting plan use the IIS7) and under the normal tag and every thing is fine then i used the url-rewriting instead of URL-Routing and the same problem exist and i notice that the session also not working in the virtual sub-directories too and by the way the ASP.NET routing work fine with my site its just the profile and session objects that not workin any help will be appreciated

    Read the article

  • Information Spilling Across Object Boundaries

    - by Winston Ewert
    Many times my business objects tend to have situations where information needs to cross object boundaries too often. When doing OO, we want information to be in one object and as much as possible all code dealing with that information should be in that object. However, business rules do not follow this principle giving me trouble. As an example suppose that we have an Order which has a number of OrderItems which refers to an InventoryItem which has a price. I invoke Order.GetTotal() which sums the result of OrderItem.GetPrice() which multiples a quantity by InventoryItem.GetPrice(). So far so good. But then we find out that some items are sold with a two for one deal. We can handle this by having OrderItem.GetPrice() do something like InventoryItem.GetPrice( quantity ) and letting InventoryItem deal with this. However, then we find out that the two-for-one deal only lasts for a particular time period. This time period needs to be based on the date of the order. Now we change OrderItem.GetPrice() to be InventoryItem.GetPrice( quatity, order.GetDate() ) But then we need to support different prices depending on how long the customer has been in the system: InventoryItem.GetPrice( quantity, order.GetDate(), order.GetCustomer() ) But then it turns out that the two-for-one deals apply not just to buying multiple of the same inventory item but multiple for any item in a InventoryCategory. At this point we throw up our hands and just give the InventoryItem the order item and allow it to travel over the object reference graph via accessors to get the information its needs: InventoryItem.GetPrice( this ) TL;DR I want to have coupling in objects, but business rules often force me to access information from all over the place in order to make particular decisions. Are there good techniques for dealing with this? Do others find the same problem?

    Read the article

  • Creating a dynamic, extensible C# Expando Object

    - by Rick Strahl
    I love dynamic functionality in a strongly typed language because it offers us the best of both worlds. In C# (or any of the main .NET languages) we now have the dynamic type that provides a host of dynamic features for the static C# language. One place where I've found dynamic to be incredibly useful is in building extensible types or types that expose traditionally non-object data (like dictionaries) in easier to use and more readable syntax. I wrote about a couple of these for accessing old school ADO.NET DataRows and DataReaders more easily for example. These classes are dynamic wrappers that provide easier syntax and auto-type conversions which greatly simplifies code clutter and increases clarity in existing code. ExpandoObject in .NET 4.0 Another great use case for dynamic objects is the ability to create extensible objects - objects that start out with a set of static members and then can add additional properties and even methods dynamically. The .NET 4.0 framework actually includes an ExpandoObject class which provides a very dynamic object that allows you to add properties and methods on the fly and then access them again. For example with ExpandoObject you can do stuff like this:dynamic expand = new ExpandoObject(); expand.Name = "Rick"; expand.HelloWorld = (Func<string, string>) ((string name) => { return "Hello " + name; }); Console.WriteLine(expand.Name); Console.WriteLine(expand.HelloWorld("Dufus")); Internally ExpandoObject uses a Dictionary like structure and interface to store properties and methods and then allows you to add and access properties and methods easily. As cool as ExpandoObject is it has a few shortcomings too: It's a sealed type so you can't use it as a base class It only works off 'properties' in the internal Dictionary - you can't expose existing type data It doesn't serialize to XML or with DataContractSerializer/DataContractJsonSerializer Expando - A truly extensible Object ExpandoObject is nice if you just need a dynamic container for a dictionary like structure. However, if you want to build an extensible object that starts out with a set of strongly typed properties and then allows you to extend it, ExpandoObject does not work because it's a sealed class that can't be inherited. I started thinking about this very scenario for one of my applications I'm building for a customer. In this system we are connecting to various different user stores. Each user store has the same basic requirements for username, password, name etc. But then each store also has a number of extended properties that is available to each application. In the real world scenario the data is loaded from the database in a data reader and the known properties are assigned from the known fields in the database. All unknown fields are then 'added' to the expando object dynamically. In the past I've done this very thing with a separate property - Properties - just like I do for this class. But the property and dictionary syntax is not ideal and tedious to work with. I started thinking about how to represent these extra property structures. One way certainly would be to add a Dictionary, or an ExpandoObject to hold all those extra properties. But wouldn't it be nice if the application could actually extend an existing object that looks something like this as you can with the Expando object:public class User : Westwind.Utilities.Dynamic.Expando { public string Email { get; set; } public string Password { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } public bool Active { get; set; } public DateTime? ExpiresOn { get; set; } } and then simply start extending the properties of this object dynamically? Using the Expando object I describe later you can now do the following:[TestMethod] public void UserExampleTest() { var user = new User(); // Set strongly typed properties user.Email = "[email protected]"; user.Password = "nonya123"; user.Name = "Rickochet"; user.Active = true; // Now add dynamic properties dynamic duser = user; duser.Entered = DateTime.Now; duser.Accesses = 1; // you can also add dynamic props via indexer user["NickName"] = "AntiSocialX"; duser["WebSite"] = "http://www.west-wind.com/weblog"; // Access strong type through dynamic ref Assert.AreEqual(user.Name,duser.Name); // Access strong type through indexer Assert.AreEqual(user.Password,user["Password"]); // access dyanmically added value through indexer Assert.AreEqual(duser.Entered,user["Entered"]); // access index added value through dynamic Assert.AreEqual(user["NickName"],duser.NickName); // loop through all properties dynamic AND strong type properties (true) foreach (var prop in user.GetProperties(true)) { object val = prop.Value; if (val == null) val = "null"; Console.WriteLine(prop.Key + ": " + val.ToString()); } } As you can see this code somewhat blurs the line between a static and dynamic type. You start with a strongly typed object that has a fixed set of properties. You can then cast the object to dynamic (as I discussed in my last post) and add additional properties to the object. You can also use an indexer to add dynamic properties to the object. To access the strongly typed properties you can use either the strongly typed instance, the indexer or the dynamic cast of the object. Personally I think it's kinda cool to have an easy way to access strongly typed properties by string which can make some data scenarios much easier. To access the 'dynamically added' properties you can use either the indexer on the strongly typed object, or property syntax on the dynamic cast. Using the dynamic type allows all three modes to work on both strongly typed and dynamic properties. Finally you can iterate over all properties, both dynamic and strongly typed if you chose. Lots of flexibility. Note also that by default the Expando object works against the (this) instance meaning it extends the current object. You can also pass in a separate instance to the constructor in which case that object will be used to iterate over to find properties rather than this. Using this approach provides some really interesting functionality when use the dynamic type. To use this we have to add an explicit constructor to the Expando subclass:public class User : Westwind.Utilities.Dynamic.Expando { public string Email { get; set; } public string Password { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } public bool Active { get; set; } public DateTime? ExpiresOn { get; set; } public User() : base() { } // only required if you want to mix in seperate instance public User(object instance) : base(instance) { } } to allow the instance to be passed. When you do you can now do:[TestMethod] public void ExpandoMixinTest() { // have Expando work on Addresses var user = new User( new Address() ); // cast to dynamicAccessToPropertyTest dynamic duser = user; // Set strongly typed properties duser.Email = "[email protected]"; user.Password = "nonya123"; // Set properties on address object duser.Address = "32 Kaiea"; //duser.Phone = "808-123-2131"; // set dynamic properties duser.NonExistantProperty = "This works too"; // shows default value Address.Phone value Console.WriteLine(duser.Phone); } Using the dynamic cast in this case allows you to access *three* different 'objects': The strong type properties, the dynamically added properties in the dictionary and the properties of the instance passed in! Effectively this gives you a way to simulate multiple inheritance (which is scary - so be very careful with this, but you can do it). How Expando works Behind the scenes Expando is a DynamicObject subclass as I discussed in my last post. By implementing a few of DynamicObject's methods you can basically create a type that can trap 'property missing' and 'method missing' operations. When you access a non-existant property a known method is fired that our code can intercept and provide a value for. Internally Expando uses a custom dictionary implementation to hold the dynamic properties you might add to your expandable object. Let's look at code first. The code for the Expando type is straight forward and given what it provides relatively short. Here it is.using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Dynamic; using System.Reflection; namespace Westwind.Utilities.Dynamic { /// <summary> /// Class that provides extensible properties and methods. This /// dynamic object stores 'extra' properties in a dictionary or /// checks the actual properties of the instance. /// /// This means you can subclass this expando and retrieve either /// native properties or properties from values in the dictionary. /// /// This type allows you three ways to access its properties: /// /// Directly: any explicitly declared properties are accessible /// Dynamic: dynamic cast allows access to dictionary and native properties/methods /// Dictionary: Any of the extended properties are accessible via IDictionary interface /// </summary> [Serializable] public class Expando : DynamicObject, IDynamicMetaObjectProvider { /// <summary> /// Instance of object passed in /// </summary> object Instance; /// <summary> /// Cached type of the instance /// </summary> Type InstanceType; PropertyInfo[] InstancePropertyInfo { get { if (_InstancePropertyInfo == null && Instance != null) _InstancePropertyInfo = Instance.GetType().GetProperties(BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.DeclaredOnly); return _InstancePropertyInfo; } } PropertyInfo[] _InstancePropertyInfo; /// <summary> /// String Dictionary that contains the extra dynamic values /// stored on this object/instance /// </summary> /// <remarks>Using PropertyBag to support XML Serialization of the dictionary</remarks> public PropertyBag Properties = new PropertyBag(); //public Dictionary<string,object> Properties = new Dictionary<string, object>(); /// <summary> /// This constructor just works off the internal dictionary and any /// public properties of this object. /// /// Note you can subclass Expando. /// </summary> public Expando() { Initialize(this); } /// <summary> /// Allows passing in an existing instance variable to 'extend'. /// </summary> /// <remarks> /// You can pass in null here if you don't want to /// check native properties and only check the Dictionary! /// </remarks> /// <param name="instance"></param> public Expando(object instance) { Initialize(instance); } protected virtual void Initialize(object instance) { Instance = instance; if (instance != null) InstanceType = instance.GetType(); } /// <summary> /// Try to retrieve a member by name first from instance properties /// followed by the collection entries. /// </summary> /// <param name="binder"></param> /// <param name="result"></param> /// <returns></returns> public override bool TryGetMember(GetMemberBinder binder, out object result) { result = null; // first check the Properties collection for member if (Properties.Keys.Contains(binder.Name)) { result = Properties[binder.Name]; return true; } // Next check for Public properties via Reflection if (Instance != null) { try { return GetProperty(Instance, binder.Name, out result); } catch { } } // failed to retrieve a property result = null; return false; } /// <summary> /// Property setter implementation tries to retrieve value from instance /// first then into this object /// </summary> /// <param name="binder"></param> /// <param name="value"></param> /// <returns></returns> public override bool TrySetMember(SetMemberBinder binder, object value) { // first check to see if there's a native property to set if (Instance != null) { try { bool result = SetProperty(Instance, binder.Name, value); if (result) return true; } catch { } } // no match - set or add to dictionary Properties[binder.Name] = value; return true; } /// <summary> /// Dynamic invocation method. Currently allows only for Reflection based /// operation (no ability to add methods dynamically). /// </summary> /// <param name="binder"></param> /// <param name="args"></param> /// <param name="result"></param> /// <returns></returns> public override bool TryInvokeMember(InvokeMemberBinder binder, object[] args, out object result) { if (Instance != null) { try { // check instance passed in for methods to invoke if (InvokeMethod(Instance, binder.Name, args, out result)) return true; } catch { } } result = null; return false; } /// <summary> /// Reflection Helper method to retrieve a property /// </summary> /// <param name="instance"></param> /// <param name="name"></param> /// <param name="result"></param> /// <returns></returns> protected bool GetProperty(object instance, string name, out object result) { if (instance == null) instance = this; var miArray = InstanceType.GetMember(name, BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.GetProperty | BindingFlags.Instance); if (miArray != null && miArray.Length > 0) { var mi = miArray[0]; if (mi.MemberType == MemberTypes.Property) { result = ((PropertyInfo)mi).GetValue(instance,null); return true; } } result = null; return false; } /// <summary> /// Reflection helper method to set a property value /// </summary> /// <param name="instance"></param> /// <param name="name"></param> /// <param name="value"></param> /// <returns></returns> protected bool SetProperty(object instance, string name, object value) { if (instance == null) instance = this; var miArray = InstanceType.GetMember(name, BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.SetProperty | BindingFlags.Instance); if (miArray != null && miArray.Length > 0) { var mi = miArray[0]; if (mi.MemberType == MemberTypes.Property) { ((PropertyInfo)mi).SetValue(Instance, value, null); return true; } } return false; } /// <summary> /// Reflection helper method to invoke a method /// </summary> /// <param name="instance"></param> /// <param name="name"></param> /// <param name="args"></param> /// <param name="result"></param> /// <returns></returns> protected bool InvokeMethod(object instance, string name, object[] args, out object result) { if (instance == null) instance = this; // Look at the instanceType var miArray = InstanceType.GetMember(name, BindingFlags.InvokeMethod | BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance); if (miArray != null && miArray.Length > 0) { var mi = miArray[0] as MethodInfo; result = mi.Invoke(Instance, args); return true; } result = null; return false; } /// <summary> /// Convenience method that provides a string Indexer /// to the Properties collection AND the strongly typed /// properties of the object by name. /// /// // dynamic /// exp["Address"] = "112 nowhere lane"; /// // strong /// var name = exp["StronglyTypedProperty"] as string; /// </summary> /// <remarks> /// The getter checks the Properties dictionary first /// then looks in PropertyInfo for properties. /// The setter checks the instance properties before /// checking the Properties dictionary. /// </remarks> /// <param name="key"></param> /// /// <returns></returns> public object this[string key] { get { try { // try to get from properties collection first return Properties[key]; } catch (KeyNotFoundException ex) { // try reflection on instanceType object result = null; if (GetProperty(Instance, key, out result)) return result; // nope doesn't exist throw; } } set { if (Properties.ContainsKey(key)) { Properties[key] = value; return; } // check instance for existance of type first var miArray = InstanceType.GetMember(key, BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.GetProperty); if (miArray != null && miArray.Length > 0) SetProperty(Instance, key, value); else Properties[key] = value; } } /// <summary> /// Returns and the properties of /// </summary> /// <param name="includeProperties"></param> /// <returns></returns> public IEnumerable<KeyValuePair<string,object>> GetProperties(bool includeInstanceProperties = false) { if (includeInstanceProperties && Instance != null) { foreach (var prop in this.InstancePropertyInfo) yield return new KeyValuePair<string, object>(prop.Name, prop.GetValue(Instance, null)); } foreach (var key in this.Properties.Keys) yield return new KeyValuePair<string, object>(key, this.Properties[key]); } /// <summary> /// Checks whether a property exists in the Property collection /// or as a property on the instance /// </summary> /// <param name="item"></param> /// <returns></returns> public bool Contains(KeyValuePair<string, object> item, bool includeInstanceProperties = false) { bool res = Properties.ContainsKey(item.Key); if (res) return true; if (includeInstanceProperties && Instance != null) { foreach (var prop in this.InstancePropertyInfo) { if (prop.Name == item.Key) return true; } } return false; } } } Although the Expando class supports an indexer, it doesn't actually implement IDictionary or even IEnumerable. It only provides the indexer and Contains() and GetProperties() methods, that work against the Properties dictionary AND the internal instance. The reason for not implementing IDictionary is that a) it doesn't add much value since you can access the Properties dictionary directly and that b) I wanted to keep the interface to class very lean so that it can serve as an entity type if desired. Implementing these IDictionary (or even IEnumerable) causes LINQ extension methods to pop up on the type which obscures the property interface and would only confuse the purpose of the type. IDictionary and IEnumerable are also problematic for XML and JSON Serialization - the XML Serializer doesn't serialize IDictionary<string,object>, nor does the DataContractSerializer. The JavaScriptSerializer does serialize, but it treats the entire object like a dictionary and doesn't serialize the strongly typed properties of the type, only the dictionary values which is also not desirable. Hence the decision to stick with only implementing the indexer to support the user["CustomProperty"] functionality and leaving iteration functions to the publicly exposed Properties dictionary. Note that the Dictionary used here is a custom PropertyBag class I created to allow for serialization to work. One important aspect for my apps is that whatever custom properties get added they have to be accessible to AJAX clients since the particular app I'm working on is a SIngle Page Web app where most of the Web access is through JSON AJAX calls. PropertyBag can serialize to XML and one way serialize to JSON using the JavaScript serializer (not the DCS serializers though). The key components that make Expando work in this code are the Properties Dictionary and the TryGetMember() and TrySetMember() methods. The Properties collection is public so if you choose you can explicitly access the collection to get better performance or to manipulate the members in internal code (like loading up dynamic values form a database). Notice that TryGetMember() and TrySetMember() both work against the dictionary AND the internal instance to retrieve and set properties. This means that user["Name"] works against native properties of the object as does user["Name"] = "RogaDugDog". What's your Use Case? This is still an early prototype but I've plugged it into one of my customer's applications and so far it's working very well. The key features for me were the ability to easily extend the type with values coming from a database and exposing those values in a nice and easy to use manner. I'm also finding that using this type of object for ViewModels works very well to add custom properties to view models. I suspect there will be lots of uses for this - I've been using the extra dictionary approach to extensibility for years - using a dynamic type to make the syntax cleaner is just a bonus here. What can you think of to use this for? Resources Source Code and Tests (GitHub) Also integrated in Westwind.Utilities of the West Wind Web Toolkit West Wind Utilities NuGet© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in CSharp  .NET  Dynamic Types   Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

  • How do I prove or disprove "god" objects are wrong?

    - by honestduane
    Problem Summary: Long story short, I inherited a code base and an development team I am not allowed to replace and the use of God Objects is a big issue. Going forward, I want to have us re-factor things but I am getting push-back from the teams who want to do everything with God Objects "because its easier" and this means I would not be allowed to re-factor. I pushed back citing my years of dev experience, that I'm the new boss who was hired to know these things, etc, and so did the third party offshore companies account sales rep, and this is now at the executive level and my meeting is tomorrow and I want to go in with a lot of technical ammo to advocate best practices because I feel it will be cheaper in the long run (And I personally feel that is what the third party is worried about) for the company. My issue is from a technical level, I know its good long term but I'm having trouble with the ultra short term and 6 months term, and while its something I "know" I cant prove it with references and cited resources outside of one person (Robert C. Martin, aka Uncle Bob), as that is what I am being asked to do as I have been told having data from one person and only one person (Robert C Martin) is not good enough of an argument. Question: What are some resources I can cite directly (Title, year published, page number, quote) by well known experts in the field that explicitly say this use of "God" Objects/Classes/Systems is bad (or good, since we are looking for the most technically valid solution)? Research I have already done: I have a number of books here and I have searched their indexes for the use of the words "god object" and "god class". I found that oddly its almost never used and the copy of the GoF book I have for example, never uses it (At least according to the index in front of me) but I have found it in 2 books per the below, but I want more I can use. I checked the Wikipedia page for "God Object" and its currently a stub with little reference links so although I personally agree with that it says, It doesn't have much I can use in an environment where personal experience is not considered valid. The book cited is also considered too old to be valid by the people I am debating these technical points with as the argument they are making is that "it was once thought to be bad but nobody could prove it, and now modern software says "god" objects are good to use". I personally believe that this statement is incorrect, but I want to prove the truth, whatever it is. In Robert C Martin's "Agile Principles, Patterns, and Practices in C#" (ISBN: 0-13-185725-8, hardcover) where on page 266 it states "Everybody knows that god classes are a bad idea. We don't want to concentrate all the intelligence of a system into a single object or a single function. One of the goals of OOD is the partitioning and distribution of behavior into many classes and many function." -- And then goes on to say sometimes its better to use God Classes anyway sometimes (Citing micro-controllers as an example). In Robert C Martin's "Clean Code: A Handbook of Agile Software Craftsmanship" page 136 (And only this page) talks about the "God class" and calls it out as a prime example of a violation of the "classes should be small" rule he uses to promote the Single Responsibility Principle" starting on on page 138. The problem I have is all my references and citations come from the same person (Robert C. Martin), and am from the same single person/source. I am being told that because he is just one guy, my desire to not use "God Classes" is invalid and not accepted as a standard best practice in the software industry. Is this true? Am I doing things wrong from a technical perspective by trying to keep to the teaching of Uncle Bob? God Objects and Object Oriented Programming and Design: The more I think of this the more I think this is more something you learn when you study OOP and its never explicitly called out; Its implicit to good design is my thinking (Feel free to correct me, please, as I want to learn), The problem is I "know" this, but but not everybody does, so in this case its not considered a valid argument because I am effectively calling it out as universal truth when in fact most people are statistically ignorant of it since statistically most people are not programmers. Conclusion: I am at a loss on what to search for to get the best additional results to cite, since they are making a technical claim and I want to know the truth and be able to prove it with citations like a real engineer/scientist, even if I am biased against god objects due to my personal experience with code that used them. Any assistance or citations would be deeply appreciated.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >