I'm working on a MVVM application, using MVVM Light and on the whole I'm finding it very nice to work with. I have a nagging issue however and hope someone can help.
I'm using sending instances of DialogMessage from VM to the View to display dialogs. The result is sent back to my VM via a callback, all good so far.
However the result of the dialog (OK, Yes, No, Cancel etc) is sent back as a member of the enum System.Windows.MessageBoxResult. This seems to go against the View/ViewModel separation to me, MessageBoxResult is clearly a type from the UI and so the VM shouldn't be dependent upon this or anything from the System.Windows namespace.
What I'm looking for is someway of using DialogMessage with an alternative callback eg Action<UserResult>; rather than Action<System.Windows.MessageBoxResult>;, where UserResult is a type defined by me to represent the users choice without dependency on MessageBoxResult.
Is this possible or am I being too strict in me desire to keep UI concepts out of the VM?
In regards to the second part of your question, when I started working with MVVM Light I too felt that receiving a MessageBoxResult back in the VM seems a little to UI-oriented.
On the other hand, if only the name was different - such as UserResult as you suggested - would that be sufficient for you?
If only the nameing of the class is a problem, I think you can let it slip. The result Ok, Yes, No, Cancel do not give an indication of whether a MessageBox was shown with buttons or whether it was some other kind of UI implementation (lets say a form with a combo box).
If it still bothers you, you can always create a wrapper for the DialogMessage which will raise the Dialog, get the MessageBoxResult and return a UserResult which can be an enum with the same values (think of it as a simple converter).
But as I said, I think it might be an overkill...
Related
Is it possible to show a message (just a warning the user can dismiss) from code in a custom function without using a task pane? (And without making it the return value of the function.) Something that shows up in the status bar, or a popup, etc.?
And obviously, if so, how do you do it?
(Office.context.ui.displayDialogAsync isn't available from the custom functions context, not even in the shared runtime.)
Thank you for reaching us. So far we don't support it. I'd recommend going to Microsoft 365 Developer Platform Ideas Forum and see if this feature has already been requested or if request a new feature. Thanks for your support!
On a linking error, I can raise appropriate diagnostic (say MyDSL.MY_APPROPRIATE_DIAGNOSTIC) and then write, in MyDSLQuickfixProvider, a quick fix for it by annotating it in this way:
#Fix(MyDSL.MY_APPROPRIATE_DIAGNOSTIC)
public void fixMyAppropriateDiagnostic(final Issue issue, final IssueResolutionAcceptor acceptor) {
...
}
What about if I wanted to automatically resolve a diagnostic, i.e. automatically execute an IModification without propose it to the user as quick fix (imagine the quick fix for the diagnostic is unique)?
Is there a way to associate a (immediate) handling code to a diagnostic in a similar manner to what happens for (user-proposed) quick fixes?
Thanks in advance,
Marco
There is no way to set a quick fix to be executed automatically. Your alternatives are:
Invoke the marker resolution code from somewhere else in your code. I.e. while marker resolutions are typically triggered explicitly on user request using the problems view, ruler buttons and similar UI, you could invoke them from anywhere. Be sure that you don't interfere with quickfixes, which are not from your plugin and make sure your users are not surprised by this non-eclipse workflow.
For some issues you may be able to instead create code completion rules or templates. Those are still not fully automatic as requested, but basically you can already "correct" partial user input that way and avoid flagging a violation for the complete input.
Does anyone know any details on the underlying eclipse builder that sends jobs to the compiler and get its report? and how to tap to it? The level of abstraction that the builder extension offers is too high and the information insufficient. So I implemented an IResourceChangeListener and played with the ResourceDelta in order to get the messages from an IMarker. It works perfectly, however I realized the message is just returning a string. So my question is, how do I do in order to get the type/reference of the object where the error is, what type of error, what class it should belongs to and all available info.
Thanks.
Have you looked at the builder documentation?
And there is also This article by John.
I think between those two and looking at the code you will find everything you need to know.
In our app we need to check if the data is saved when we are in a particular place before navigating away from it. So the user should be able to negate a browser back button request. But by the time that the history value change event is received the url has already been changed. The History class doesn't seem to have a way to restore the url back. Anybody have any ideas?
In GWT 2.1 you get Activities and Places. And activity has a maystop method, which is exactly what you want, if I understand you correctly.
Use a window.onunload or window.onbeforeunload javascript callback to confrim/save state.
onbeforeunload example
I haven't actually implemented this behavior yet, but here is my plan and maybe it will work for you.
1) Each time you receive an onHistoryChanged event and decide to allow it, save the current historyToken in an instance variable somewhere.
2) Keep track of activity on the page that should block navigation. Use a data structure that can keep track of multiple activities, like multiple file uploads, multiple edits, etc.
3) When you receive a new onHistoryChanged event, if your data structure from #2 indicates that it's not safe to navigate, avoid changing the page and restore the historyToken that you saved in #1. I'm assuming that you can do this either by:
a) Calling History.newItem(oldHistoryToken, false) or
b) Calling History.newItem(oldHistoryToken, true) and keeping a flag to force the next onHistoryChanged to be ignored.
Again, I haven't actually implemented this so let me know how it works out.
If you have links that allow the user to leave the app and you want to prevent that as well, you'll need to also add an onbeforeunload.
Have a look at the PlaceManagerImpl class from the gwt-platform framework. Especially the onValueChange() method and the methods dealing with the onLeaveQuestion field.
Hope that helps.
In this issue report, t.broyer explains in his comment that such behavior was planned during design of Places framework. The most important part is:
mayStop was a mistake, or it should have only been called when unloading the app, not for internal navigation within the app.
So probably it's better to not use it at all...
I eventually couldn't get any further with my program due to the various shortcomings of VB.NET (bad audio support, no reading events in the middle of execution, very weak keyboard input, etc). So I tried SDL.NET 6.1.
Despite its terrible documentation, I was able to fix my code to use it and I love it!
But there's a problem. I don't know how to set up my application settings for it. The Startup Object definitely should be a class (the examples always are in classes, never modules), but a startup class specifically has to be a form! This is bad because SDL makes its own window via SetVideoMode; you don't need a form. So when the form constructor New() finishes, a useless form is created and you have two windows.
I tried placing a call to the game engine loop within New() so that the game starts up without New() ever finishing. The game runs normally, and this solves the "second window" problem... but it can't be closed! X button does nothing, calls to Events.QuitApplication or Me.Close are blatantly ignored, etc.
I'm stumped. It seems I need to set a non-form class as the startup object, but it won't let me.
Oh, by the way, it seems that there are two things called "SDL NET". To clarify, I'm using this one, which exists in the SdlDotNet namespace.
Oh, I forgot to mention, I also noticed that a lot of the examples have a line that says "[STAThread]". Is this is important?
EDIT:
I've already received and accepted an answer for my question, but I want to tell other people what the problem is with exiting/closing the app, even though that wasn't my question:
While SDL.NET allows you to receive input and run other events without having to stop running logic, the application still cannot quit while logic is being run. So I find the best way to tell your SDL.NET application to Quit in the middle of running logic is to use the following TWO lines:
SdlDotNet.Core.Events.QuitApplication
End
Place these in the handler for the SdlDotNet.Core.Events.Quit event, as well as anywhere else you want your program to quit.
The Startup Object definitely should be a class (the examples always are in classes, never modules)
Here's your mistake. There's no real difference between a class and a VB module from CLR perspective. So just make it a module with Main and go on. There is no need for a class. I suspect you're looking at C# examples, which use classes - but that's because there is no such thing as a module in C#.
[STAThread] probably won't make any difference for SDL. It is important for UI applications (both WinForms and WPF require it), but I don't think that SDL does any COM calls, so it shouldn't care whether your thread is STA or not. It's just something that Visual Studio puts on Main in new projects by default.