I'm new in WPF, implementing application using reactiveUI.
I have one button and added command handler for it.
want to call the method only when canExecute is true.
in viewmodel, i have defined it
public bool canExecute
{
get { return _canExecute;}
set { _canExecute = value;}
}
Bind()
{
AddRecord = new ReactiveCommand(_canExecute);
AddRecord .Subscribe(x =>
{
AddR()
}
}
void AddR()
{
}
but its not working. how to convert it in to System.IObservable?
As #jomtois mentions, you need to fix your declaration of CanExecute:
bool canExecute;
public bool CanExecute {
get { return canExecute; }
set { this.RaiseAndSetIfChanged(ref canExecute, value); }
}
Then, you can write:
AddRecord = new ReactiveCommand(this.WhenAnyValue(x => x.CanExecute));
Why go to all this effort? This makes it so that when CanExecute changes, ReactiveCommand automatically enables / disables. However, this design is pretty imperative, I wouldn't create a CanExecute boolean, I'd think about how I can combine properties related to my ViewModel that have a semantic meaning.
Related
I need to change the Visibility of a Button on a View from method call from within a class.
I have tried accessing the VeiwModel by exposing it in the class, and then had success in changing the Property "ShowRedHat" from true to false, but this does not update the Visibility of the Button in the View. This also double loads the ViewModel, which is not acceptable in my solution.
Any help is appreciated.
The class:
public class HatEngine
{
public void SetShowRedHat()
{
????.ShowRedHat = false;
}
}
The Property in the ViewModel:
public class MyViewModel : ObservableObject
{
private bool _showRedHat;
public bool ShowRedHat
{
get { return _showRedHat; }
set
{
OnPropertyChanged(ref _showRedHat, value);
}
}
}
The Button in the View:
<Button Content="Red Hat"
Command="{Binding RedHatCommand}"
Visibility="{Binding ShowRedHat, Converter={StaticResource BoolToVis}}"/>
If the purpose of HatEngine is to be a service that is used by MyViewModel, then something like the following be the start of getting what you need.
This example uses dependency injection via the constructor; this is common in MVVM and if you're not familiar with it, I would highly recommend looking into it further.
// define delegate for event to be fired from HatEngine instances
public delegate void HatEngineNotifyEventHandler(object sender, bool shouldShow);
// interface declaration for HatEngine - this is important for injecting mocks for unit testing
public interface IHatEngine
{
event HatEngineNotifyEventHandler Notify;
void SetShowRedHat(bool show);
}
// simple IHatEngine implementation
public sealed class HatEngine : IHatEngine
{
public event HatEngineNotifyEventHandler Notify;
public void SetShowRedHat(bool show) => OnNotify(show);
private void OnNotify(bool shouldShow) =>
Notify?.Invoke(this, shouldShow);
}
public class MyViewModel : ObservableObject
{
private readonly IHatEngine _hatEngine;
private bool _showRedHat;
// MyViewModel consumes an IHatEngine instance and subscribes to its Notify event
public MyViewModel(IHatEngine hatEngine = null)
{
// many MVVM frameworks include a DI container that should be used here
// to resolve an IHatEngine instance; however, for simplicity for this
// example just create HatEngine() directly
_hatEngine = hatEngine ?? new HatEngine();
// when the event is received, update ShowRedHat accordingly
_hatEngine.Notify += (_, shouldShow) => ShowRedHat = shouldShow;
}
public bool ShowRedHat
{
get => _showRedHat;
set => OnPropertyChanged(ref _showRedHat, value);
}
}
You can just bind an integer since Visibility is an Enum, check documentation since in some versions Hidden option is not available and Collapsed becomes 1, however normally you can just use these below:
Visible [0] - Display the element.
Hidden [1] Do not display the element, but reserve space for the
element in layout.
Collapsed [2] Do not display the element, and do not reserve space for
it in layout.
I have moved xamrin.form.maps to MVVM and have set my xaml to
<viewModels:CustomMap IsShowingUser="True" x:Name="customMap" MapPosition="{Binding MyPosition}" CustomPins="{Binding PinCollection}" />
My customMap Class
public static readonly BindableProperty MapPositionProperty = BindableProperty.Create(
nameof(MapPosition),
typeof(Position),
typeof(CustomMap),
new Position(0, 0),
propertyChanged: (b, o, n) =>
{
Console.WriteLine("here");
((CustomMap)b).MoveToRegion(MapSpan.FromCenterAndRadius(
(Position)n, Distance.FromMiles(.05)));
});
public Position MapPosition
{
get { return (Position)GetValue(MapPositionProperty); }
set { SetValue(MapPositionProperty, value); }
}
From page one, I am sending a lat lng to the map. If I set MapPosition in my constructor in my VM it works perfect, the problem is getting the lat and lng to my constructor before everything is bound, other wise it will not update.
In the view model I am collecting the parameters to set the position.
public override async void OnNavigatedTo(INavigationParameters parameters)
{
if (parameters.ContainsKey("mapLocation"))
{
var mapLocation = parameters.GetValue<MapLocation>("mapLocation");
myPosition = new Position(mapLocation.Lat, mapLocation.Lng);
}
}
This has nothing to do with the time when your property is updated.
You bound MapPosition to MyPosition, which I'd guess is a property. For MVVM to work, this MapPosition has to notify that it has changed, usually this looks something like (the the documentation of INotifyPropertyChanged.PropertyChanged)
public MapLocation MyPosition
{
get => myPosition;
set
{
if(myPosition == value)
{
return;
}
myPosition = value;
OnPropertyChanged();
}
}
private void OnPropertyChanged([CallerMemberName] string memberName = null)
{
PropertyChanged?.Invoke(this, new PropertyChangedEventArgs(propertyName));
}
Your view does know that if the bound objects implements INotifyPropertyChanged it has to subscribe to PropertyChanged and can update its state accordingly if this event is raised.
Now why doesn't it work in your case?
You are not setting MyPosition, allowing the setter to raise PropertyChanged and thus the view to update its state, but you are directly setting the backing field myPosition. In this case, the setter never is called and the view has no chance to know that the value of MyPosition has changed, therefor won't update its state.
If your setter implements the pattern shown above, just change
myPosition = new Position(mapLocation.Lat, mapLocation.Lng);
to
MyPosition = new Position(mapLocation.Lat, mapLocation.Lng);
and it should work. Otherwise implement the change notification pattern in MyPosition, too.
So when writing UI in GTK it's generally preferrable to handle reading of files, etc. in an Async Method. things such as listboxes, are generally bound to a ListModel, the items in the ListBox updated in accordance with the items_changed signal.
So if I have some class, that implements ListModel, and has an add function, and some FileReader that holds a reference to said ListModel, and call add from an async function, how do i make that in essence triggering the items_changed and having GTK update accordingly?
I've tried list.items_changed.connect(message("Items changed!")); but it never triggers.
I saw this: How can one update GTK+ UI in Vala from a long operation without blocking the UI
but in this example, it's just the button label that is changed, no signal is actually triggered.
EDIT: (Codesample added at the request of #Michael Gratton
//Disclaimer: everything here is still very much a work in progress, and will, as soon as I'm confident that what I have is not total crap, be released under some GPL or other open license.
//Note: for the sake of readability, I adopted the C# naming convention for interfaces, namely, putting a capital 'I' in front of them, a decision i do not feel quite as confident in as I did earlier.
//Note: the calls to message(..) was put in here to help debugging
public class AsyncFileContext : Object{
private int64 offset;
private bool start_read;
private bool read_to_end;
private Factories.IVCardFactory factory;
private File file;
private FileMonitor monitor;
private Gee.Set<IVCard> vcard_buffer;
private IObservableSet<IVCard> _vCards;
public IObservableSet<IVCard> vCards {
owned get{
return this._vCards;
}
}
construct{
//We want to start fileops at the beginning of the file
this.offset = (int64)0;
this.start_read = true;
this.read_to_end = false;
this.vcard_buffer = new Gee.HashSet<IVCard>();
this.factory = new Factories.GenericVCardFactory();
}
public void add_vcard(IVCard card){
//TODO: implement
}
public AsyncFileContext(IObservableSet<IVCard> vcards, string path){
this._vCards = vcards;
this._vCards = IObservableSet.wrap_set<IVCard>(new Gee.HashSet<IVCard>());
this.file = File.new_for_path(path);
this.monitor = file.monitor_file(FileMonitorFlags.NONE, null);
message("1");
//TODO: add connect
this.monitor.changed.connect((file, otherfile, event) => {
if(event != FileMonitorEvent.DELETED){
bool changes_done = event == FileMonitorEvent.CHANGES_DONE_HINT;
Idle.add(() => {
read_file_async.begin(changes_done);
return false;
});
}
});
message("2");
//We don't know that changes are done yet
//TODO: Consider carefully how you want this to work when it is NOT called from an event
Idle.add(() => {
read_file_async.begin(false);
return false;
});
}
//Changes done should only be true if the FileMonitorEvent that triggers the call was CHANGES_DONE_HINT
private async void read_file_async(bool changes_done) throws IOError{
if(!this.start_read){
return;
}
this.start_read = false;
var dis = new DataInputStream(yield file.read_async());
message("3");
//If we've been reading this file, and there's then a change, we assume we need to continue where we let off
//TODO: assert that the offset isn't at the very end of the file, if so reset to 0 so we can reread the file
if(offset > 0){
dis.seek(offset, SeekType.SET);
}
string line;
int vcards_added = 0;
while((line = yield dis.read_line_async()) != null){
message("position: %s".printf(dis.tell().to_string()));
this.offset = dis.tell();
message("4");
message(line);
//if the line is empty, we want to jump to next line, and ignore the input here entirely
if(line.chomp().chug() == ""){
continue;
}
this.factory.add_line(line);
if(factory.vcard_ready){
message("creating...");
this.vcard_buffer.add(factory.create());
vcards_added++;
//If we've read-in and created an entire vcard, it's time to yield
message("Yielding...");
Idle.add(() => {
_vCards.add_all(vcard_buffer);
vcard_buffer.remove_all(_vCards);
return false;
});
Idle.add(read_file_async.callback);
yield;
message("Resuming");
}
}
//IF we expect there will be no more writing, or if we expect that we read ALL the vcards, and did not add any, it's time to go back and read through the whole thing again.
if(changes_done){ //|| vcards_added == 0){
this.offset = 0;
}
this.start_read = true;
}
}
//The main idea in this class is to just bind the IObservableCollection's item_added, item_removed and cleared signals to the items_changed of the ListModel. IObservableCollection is a class I have implemented that merely wraps Gee.Collection, it is unittested, and works as intended
public class VCardListModel : ListModel, Object{
private Gee.List<IVCard> vcard_list;
private IObservableCollection<IVCard> vcard_collection;
public VCardListModel(IObservableCollection<IVCard> vcard_collection){
this.vcard_collection = vcard_collection;
this.vcard_list = new Gee.ArrayList<IVCard>.wrap(vcard_collection.to_array());
this.vcard_collection.item_added.connect((vcard) => {
vcard_list.add(vcard);
int pos = vcard_list.index_of(vcard);
items_changed(pos, 0, 1);
});
this.vcard_collection.item_removed.connect((vcard) => {
int pos = vcard_list.index_of(vcard);
vcard_list.remove(vcard);
items_changed(pos, 1, 0);
});
this.vcard_collection.cleared.connect(() => {
items_changed(0, vcard_list.size, 0);
vcard_list.clear();
});
}
public Object? get_item(uint position){
if((vcard_list.size - 1) < position){
return null;
}
return this.vcard_list.get((int)position);
}
public Type get_item_type(){
return Type.from_name("VikingvCardIVCard");
}
public uint get_n_items(){
return (uint)this.vcard_list.size;
}
public Object? get_object(uint position){
return this.get_item((int)position);
}
}
//The IObservableCollection parsed to this classes constructor, is the one from the AsyncFileContext
public class ContactList : Gtk.ListBox{
private ListModel list_model;
public ContactList(IObservableCollection<IVCard> ivcards){
this.list_model = new VCardListModel(ivcards);
bind_model(this.list_model, create_row_func);
list_model.items_changed.connect(() => {
message("Items Changed!");
base.show_all();
});
}
private Gtk.Widget create_row_func(Object item){
return new ContactRow((IVCard)item);
}
}
Heres the way i 'solved' it.
I'm not particularly proud of this solution, but there are a couple of awful things about the Gtk ListBox, one of them being (and this might really be more of a ListModel issue) if the ListBox is bound to a ListModel, the ListBox will NOT be sortable by using the sort method, and to me at least, that is a dealbreaker. I've solved it by making a class which is basically a List wrapper, which has an 'added' signal and a 'remove' signal. Upon adding an element to the list, the added signal is then wired, so it will create a new Row object and add it to the list box. That way, data is control in a manner Similar to ListModel binding. I can not make it work without calling the ShowAll method though.
private IObservableCollection<IVCard> _ivcards;
public IObservableCollection<IVCard> ivcards {
get{
return _ivcards;
}
set{
this._ivcards = value;
foreach(var card in this._ivcards){
base.prepend(new ContactRow(card));
}
this._ivcards.item_added.connect((item) => {
base.add(new ContactRow(item));
base.show_all();
});
base.show_all();
}
}
Even though this is by no means the best code I've come up with, it works very well.
I have an abstract class in my mind and I can't implement its several features in swift, so I use C++ to deliver my thoughts:
template <class T>
class Swapping {
public:
void swap() { _foregroundIndex = backgroundIndex() }
virtual void cleanup() = 0;
T* foreground() { return _buffer[foregroundIndex()]; }
T* background() { return _buffer[backgroundIndex()]; }
void setForeground(T* foreground) { _buffer[foregroundIndex()] = foreground; }
void setBackground(T* background) { _buffer[backgroundIndex()] = background; }
private:
short foregroundIndex() { return _foregroundIndex; }
short backgroundIndex() { return _foregroundIndex ^ 1; }
short _foregroundIndex = 0;
T* _buffer[2] = {NULL, NULL};
}
The main contradiction is that
The pure virtual method cleanup() requires all subclasses to implement it explicitly (can achieve in swift with protocol)
The instance variable _foregroundIndex has an initial value (cannot achieve using protocol)
The instance variable _foregroundIndex is restricted to be private ( cannot achieve using protocol)
On the other hand, if I use a class instead of protocol, then I can't guarantee cleanup() method is overriden.
One may suggest that put the virtual method in a protocol and the instance variable in a class. That may work but is not a obsession-satisfying one.
P.S. Objective-C is not Swift. Any objc_runtime related workaround is not preferred.
There’s an obvious solution, which I have seen often but will certainly not satisfy you is:
func cleanup() {
fatalError("You must override cleanup()")
}
Then you could try using extensions to extend the protocol with default implementations, but extensions don’t allow stored properties and so you would most likely need some external objects or other magic you certainly also dislike.
As I noted above in the comments, you might need to rethink your design. I don’t know what you really intend to do, but maybe something like this would work out for you:
class Swapper<T> {
private var foregroundIndex = 0
private var backgroundIndex: Int {
return foregroundIndex ^ 1
}
private var buffer: [T?] = [nil, nil]
private let cleanupHandler: () -> ()
init(cleanupHandler: #escaping () -> ()) {
self.cleanupHandler = cleanupHandler
}
func cleanup() {
cleanupHandler()
}
var foreground: T? {
get {
return buffer[foregroundIndex]
}
set {
buffer[foregroundIndex] = newValue
}
}
var background: T? {
get {
return buffer[backgroundIndex]
}
set {
buffer[backgroundIndex] = newValue
}
}
func swap() {
foregroundIndex = backgroundIndex
}
}
This makes more sense to me as this allows any types to be swapped with any clean up handler, without having to subclass the class every time.
I am new to MvvmCross and I have a question.
I noticed that the following binding code works in one way only:
{ this, "{'CurrentIndex':{'Path':'CurrentIndex','Mode':'TwoWay'}}" }
CurrentIndex is an Int Property in the View
CurrentIndex is also an Int Property in the ViewModel
This way works!
ViewModel => View
But not this way!
View => ViewModel
I have a collection of ViewControllers and my goal was to call a DeleteCommand for the CurrentIndex in the viewModel.
However,
"Android and Touch 2 way bindings are incomplete"
Reference: MvvmCross experiences, hindsight, limitations?
My guess is the TwoWay mode only works for Controls (UILabel, UITextfield, ...) but not for Properties.
So, is there a good way to make it works in both ways? Or Are there any alternatives to my problem?
Patrick
In order for a binding to transfer any value between a View to a ViewModel, then it needs to hook into some event when the value changes.
In the ViewModel, this event is always the event in the INotifyProperty interface.
In the View/Activity, there is one single pattern employed - so each binding has to hook into a separate event. For example, the Text on EditText is hooked up using the TextChanged event (see MvxEditTextTextTargetBinding.cs) while the value in a SeekBar is hooked up using a Listener object rather than an event (see MvxSeekBarProgressTargetBinging.cs).
So if you wanted to implement this two-way binding for your activity, then you could do this by:
declaring an event - CurrentIndexChanged - in your activity (MyActivity) which is fired whenever CurrentIndex changes
declare a custom binding for your MyActivity which programmatically links CurrentIndex and CurrentIndexChanged
adding the custom binding to the binding registry during Setup
For example, your activity might include:
public event EventHandler CurrentIndexChanged;
private int _currentIndex;
public int CurrentIndex
{
get { return _currentIndex; }
set { _currentIndex = value; if (CurrentIndexChanged != null) CurrentIndexChanged(this, EventArgs.Empty); }
}
And you might then declare a binding class like:
public class MyBinding : MvxPropertyInfoTargetBinding<MyActivity>
{
public MyBinding (object target, PropertyInfo targetPropertyInfo)
: base(target, targetPropertyInfo)
{
View.CurrentIndexChanged += OnCurrentIndexChanged;
}
public override MvxBindingMode DefaultMode
{
get
{
return MvxBindingMode.TwoWay;
}
}
private void OnCurrentIndexChanged(object sender, EventArgs ignored)
{
FireValueChanged(View.CurrentIndex);
}
protected override void Dispose(bool isDisposing)
{
base.Dispose(isDisposing);
if (isDisposing)
{
View.CurrentIndexChanged -= OnCurrentIndexChanged;
}
}
}
And you'd need to tell the binding system about this binding in setup like:
registry.RegisterFactory(new MvxSimplePropertyInfoTargetBindingFactory(typeof(MyBinding), typeof(MyActivity), "CurrentIndex"));
However... at a practical level, if you are operating in C# rather than in XML, then you might be better off in this case using C# to simply update the ViewModel rather than using declarative binding in this case.
To be clear... in this case, I would most probably just write the Activity property as:
public int CurrentIndex
{
get { return _currentIndex; }
set { _currentIndex = value; ViewModel.CurrentIndex = value; }
}
Or... I'd consider not having this property in the Activity at all.
If it helps, there's some more information on custom bindings in:
MonoTouch MVVMCross binding to instance variables
In MvvmCross how do I do custom bind properties
Hope this helps! IMHO the bindings are there to help you when you're working in XML - you don't have to use them...
Stuart
UPDATE If you are going to do lots of these and follow the same name pattern - using property named X with changed EventHandler event named XChanged then something like this might work - it uses reflection to find the event automagically:
public class MyBinding<T> : MvxPropertyInfoTargetBinding<T>
where T : class
{
private readonly PropertyInfo _propertyInfo;
private readonly EventInfo _eventInfo;
public MyBinding(object target, PropertyInfo targetPropertyInfo)
: base(target, targetPropertyInfo)
{
_propertyInfo = targetPropertyInfo;
var eventName = _propertyInfo.Name + "Changed";
_eventInfo = View.GetType().GetEvent(eventName);
if (_eventInfo == null)
{
throw new MvxException("Event missing " + eventName);
}
if (_eventInfo.EventHandlerType != typeof(EventHandler))
{
throw new MvxException("Event type mismatch for " + eventName);
}
var addMethod = _eventInfo.GetAddMethod();
addMethod.Invoke(View, new object[] { new EventHandler(OnChanged) });
}
public override MvxBindingMode DefaultMode
{
get
{
return MvxBindingMode.TwoWay;
}
}
private void OnChanged(object sender, EventArgs ignored)
{
var value = _propertyInfo.GetValue(View, null);
FireValueChanged(value);
}
protected override void Dispose(bool isDisposing)
{
base.Dispose(isDisposing);
if (isDisposing)
{
var removeMethod = _eventInfo.GetRemoveMethod();
removeMethod.Invoke(View, new object[] { new EventHandler(OnChanged) });
}
}
}