Calculated columns should be where in MVVM model? - mvvm

I have a WPF DataGrid displaying Products. I have two fields price and mass in that which are actually the properties of Product class. I need to show a seperate column in grid name MultipliedValue = price * mass. As per MVVM model where should i do it ?
1) In model by making a readonly property.
2) In converter so that only my UI will be aware of that?
3) or in View model?
Please suggest which option i should choose and why?
Thanks.

I would disregard option #2 from the beginning -- converters should be used only to account for implementation details of the UI, and specifically in MVVM perhaps not even then (as you can do the conversion inside the ViewModel, which is option #3 and more convenient).
Between #1 and #3, in this case IMHO it's best to go with #1 -- price is not something that's only relevant for your UI and of course the concept of price (and how it is derived) is going to stay fixed throughout your application. Both the UI and your backend may choose to use this property or not.

I would argue differently (than #jon). I put in the model only properties that I would like to serialize (say, from the server). Computed properties don't serialize, and hence they aren't in the model.
Recently, my favorite Model/View Model paradigm as as follow: Product is a class in the Model, that has nothing but the simplest getters and setters. ProductVm is a class in the VM, which contains Product, and has the additional VM logic. Most importantly, the property changed notification - which in my opinion is also part of the VM and not the model.
// Model:
class Product {
public double Price { get; set; }
public double Mass { get; set; }
}
// View Model:
class ProductVM : INotifyPropertyChanged
{
Product _product;
public event PropertyChangedEventHandler PropertyChanged;
public double Price {
get { return _product.Price; }
set { _product.Price = value; raise("Price"); raise("Total"); }
}
public double Mass {
get { return _product.Mass; }
set { _product.Mass = value; raise("Mass"); raise("Total"); }
}
public double total {
get { return Price * Mass; }
}
private void raise(string name) {
if( PropertyChanged ) {
PropertyChanged( this, new PropertyChangedEventArgs(name) );
}
}
public ProductVm( Product p ) {
_product = p;
}
public ProductVm() {
// in case you need this
_product = new Product();
}
}
Yes, there is a lot of boilerplate here, but once you do all the typing, you'll find this separation between Model and ViewModel very helpful. My 2 cents.
Note: I think #Jon approach is also correct, and is reasons are valid. I don't think there is one answer.

Related

How to implement a State Pattern for Blazor pages using multiple components to build a page?

I have a Blazor page that utilizes multiple components within it - how can I implement a State pattern (ideally per-page) that would be able to handle the current state of a page?
Currently I have all of the state and state-manipulation being done on the page (and via injected Services), but I imagine it would be cleaner to implement a state pattern where each page has some kind of State object which then allows you to manipulate the page and its components in a strict manner.
Ideally the State object would implement INotifyPropertyChanged and be able to dynamically have its State updated, but I also don't hate the idea of having the State object relegate State-manipulation to methods on the object to make sure state isn't just 1-off updated on the Blazor page.
I've already tried to implement some kind of MVVM pattern, but that turned into more questions than answers.
I started to create a State object for the current page being worked on, but I'm not sure if I should basically just be putting most of the logic that was on the Blazor page in the State object, or if I should still have some data, but delegating the heavy lifting to the State.
eg: I have some code that used to be in the "OnAfterRenderAsync" function on the Blazor page, but I'm in the process of moving basically everything in there to a "LoadMatterDetails()" function in the State object that is handling that. Does this make sense, or should I only really have object State in the state object, and writing to & reading from the State object when particular pieces of information are available?
public class MatterDetailsState : IMatterDetailsState
{
private readonly IMatterDetailsService matterDetailsService;
private readonly NavigationManager navigationManager;
public bool EditMode { get; private set; } = false;
public int EditMatterId { get; private set; } = 0;
public Matter Matter { get; set; } = new();
public MatterPaymentOptionDetails PaymentDetails { get; set; } = new();
public List<MatterStatus> MatterStatuses { get; private set; } = new();
public MatterDetailsState(
IAppState appState,
IMatterDetailsService matterDetailsService,
NavigationManager navigationManager)
{
this.matterDetailsService = matterDetailsService;
this.navigationManager = navigationManager;
}
public async Task LoadMatterDetails()
{
// Query Params handling
var uri = navigationManager.ToAbsoluteUri(navigationManager.Uri);
var decryptedUri = HelperFunctions.Decrypt(uri.Query);
var queryParamFound = QueryHelpers.ParseQuery(decryptedUri).TryGetValue("MatterID", out StringValues uriMatterID);
if (queryParamFound)
{
EditMatterId = Convert.ToInt32(uriMatterID);
EditMode = !String.IsNullOrEmpty(uriMatterID) && EditMatterId > 0;
}
await LoadMatterStatuses();
if (EditMode)
{
Matter = await matterDetailsService.GetMatterByIdAsync(EditMatterId);
PaymentDetails = await matterDetailsService.GetMatterPaymentInfoByMatterId(EditMatterId);
}
}
private async Task LoadMatterStatuses()
{
MatterStatuses = await matterDetailsService.GetAvailableMatterStatusesAsync();
}
}
Basically, should I instead of having more or less the entire function in the State object, or only make the calls like setting Matter & PaymentDetails go through functions in the State object? Not sure what the standard for this is.
I've used Fluxor, which is a Flux/Redux library for Blazor, and have liked it. It holds all your state in an object which you can inject into your component for read access. You then manage state by dispatching actions from your components which are processed by effects or reducers which are essentially methods that process the action and make changes to state. It keeps everything neat, separated and very testable in my experience.
https://github.com/mrpmorris/Fluxor
There isn't a "standard", but applying good coding practices such as the "Single Responsivity Principle" and Clean Design principles drives you in a certain direction.
I divide the presentation and UI code into three:
UI - components and UI logic
State - data that you want to track state on.
Data Management - getting, saving,....
Each represented by one or more objects (Data Management is the ViewModel in MVVM).
You can see an example of this in this answer - https://stackoverflow.com/a/75157903/13065781
The problem is then how do you create a ViewModel instance that is scoped the same as the Form component. You either:
Scope the VM as transient - you can cascade it in the form if sub components need direct access to it. This is the approach in the referenced example.
Create an instance from the IServiceProvider using ActivatorUtilities and deal with the disposal in the form component.
If the VM implements IDisposable/IAsycDisposable the you have to do the second.
The following extension class adds two methods to the IServiceProvider that wrap up this functionality.
public static class ServiceUtilities
{
public static bool TryGetComponentService<TService>(this IServiceProvider serviceProvider,[NotNullWhen(true)] out TService? service) where TService : class
{
service = serviceProvider.GetComponentService<TService>();
return service != null;
}
public static TService? GetComponentService<TService>(this IServiceProvider serviceProvider) where TService : class
{
var serviceType = serviceProvider.GetService<TService>()?.GetType();
if (serviceType is null)
return ActivatorUtilities.CreateInstance<TService>(serviceProvider);
return ActivatorUtilities.CreateInstance(serviceProvider, serviceType) as TService;
}
}
Your form then can look something like this:
public partial class UIForm: UIWrapperBase, IAsyncDisposable
{
[Inject] protected IServiceProvider ServiceProvider { get; set; } = default!;
public MyEditorPresenter Presenter { get; set; } = default!;
private IDisposable? _disposable;
public override Task SetParametersAsync(ParameterView parameters)
{
// overries the base as we need to make sure we set up the Presenter Service before any rendering takes place
parameters.SetParameterProperties(this);
if (!initialized)
{
// Gets an instance of the Presenter from the Service Provider
this.Presenter = ServiceProvider.GetComponentService<MyEditorPresenter>() ?? default!;
if (this.Presenter is null)
throw new NullReferenceException($"No Presenter could be created.");
_disposable = this.Presenter as IDisposable;
}
return base.SetParametersAsync(ParameterView.Empty);
}
//....
public async ValueTask DisposeAsync()
{
_disposable?.Dispose();
if (this.Presenter is IAsyncDisposable asyncDisposable)
await asyncDisposable.DisposeAsync();
}
}

How to get EF POCOs from System.Data.Entities.DynamicProxies

My question is the same as this one
However, I don't really see a solution there. Lets say I have a simple model with two POCOs, Country and State.
public class Country
{
public string Code { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
}
public class State
{
public string Code { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public virtual Country Country { get; set; }
}
When I use the repository to .GetStateByCode(myCode), it retrieves a dynamic proxy object. I want to send that over the wire using a WCF service to my client. The dynamic proxy is not a know type so it fails.
Here are my alternatives. I can set ProxyCreationEnabled to false on the context and then my .GetStateByCode(myCode) gives me a POCO which is great. However, the navigation property in the POCO to Country is then NULL (not great).
Should I new up a state POCO and manually populate and return that from the dynamic proxy that is returned from the repository? Should I try to use AutoMapper to map the dynamic proxy objects to POCOs? Is there something I'm totally missing here?
I think the answer from Ladislav Mrnka is clear. The Warnings Still apply. Even with this idea below. Becareful what gets picked Up. He just didnt include , if you want to proceed how to easily get data from Object a to object B. That is question at hand really.
Sample solution
See nuget package ValueInjecter (not the only tool that can do this... but very easy to use)
it allows easy copying of One object to another especially with the same properties and types.
( remember the lazy loading / navigation implications).
So vanilla option is :
var PocoObject = new Poco();
PocoObject.InjectFrom(DynamicProxy); // copy contents of DynamicProxy to PocoObject
but check the default behaviour and consider a custom rule
var PocoObject = new Poco();
PocoObject.InjectFrom<CopyRule>(DynamicProxy);
public class CopyRule : ConventionInjection
{
protected override bool Match(ConventionInfo c)
{
bool usePropertry; // return if the property it be included in inject process
usePropertry = c.SourceProp.Name == "Id"; // just an example
//or
// usePropertry = c.SourceProp.Type... == "???"
return usePropertry;
}
}

inject behaviour on manual created objects

I'm working with autofac. So far i resolve all my dependencies with constructor injection.
There is a case where i get stuck:
Considering the given customer class:
public class Customer : ICustomer
{
public string Name { get; set; }
private int ExternId { get; set; }
public IExternalIdProvider externalIdProvider { get; set; }
public Customer()
{
this.externalIdProvider = new ConcreteIdProvider(this);
}
public BevorSave()
{
this.ExternId = externalIdProvider.GetNextId();
}
}
In Order to create a new customer object based on a request or gui action. I use the new Operator. However - There is an IdProvider within the CustomerClass i want to inject. (as property).
If the Customer would be resolved by the ioC Container i would use a configuration like:
builder.RegisterType<ConcreteIdProvider>().As<IExternalIdProvider>();
builder.RegisterType<Customer>().As<ICustomer>()
.OnActivated(ae =>
{
IExternalIdProvider idProvider =
ae.Context.Resolve<IExternalIdProvider>(TypedParameter.From(ae.Instance));
ae.Instance.externalIdProvider = idProvider;
});
My Question is: How can I inject the behaviour of the ExternalIdProvider in the Customer? (using autofac)
This article shows a sample, how this would be done with a service locator:
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/simonince/archive/2008/06/30/dependency-injection-is-dead.aspx
Thanks for your help.
You should reconsider having behavior on your entities. Having behavior in your entities forces you to do dependency injection on them, and this leads to an awkward situation, which you already noticed. Take a look at this related SO question and Mark Seemann's great answer.
So instead of having these operations on the Customer class, move them to an repository class. Other patterns to look at are unit of work, commands and queries.

What are the options for creating an object model that need caching using entity framework and postsharp?

I am working with an internet application that has high demands for performance which means that a good caching functionality is crucial for our success.
The solution is built with Entity Framework Code First for the database access and Postsharp for caching. For the moment the model looks something like below.
public class Article
{
private readonly IProducerOperator _producerOperator;
public Article(IProducerOperator operator)
{ _producerOperator = operator; }
public int Id { get; set; }
...
public int ProducerId { get; set; }
public Producer Producer {
get { return _producerOperator.GetProducer(ProducerId); }
}
}
The operations classes looks like below.
public class ArticleOperations : IArticleOperations
{
private readonly IDataContext _context;
public ArticleOperations(IDataContext context)
{ _context = context; }
[Cache]
public Article GetArticle(int id)
{
var article = _context.Article.Find(id);
return article;
}
}
public class ProducerOperations : IProducerOperations
{
private readonly IDataContext _context;
public ProducerOperations(IDataContext context)
{ _context = context; }
[Cache]
public Producer GetProducer(int id)
{
var producer = _context.Producer.Find(id);
return producer;
}
}
I am NOT fond of having dependendencies in the business objects but the argument for it is to having lazy loading from the cache... for the most. This solution also means that caching is done only once for producer... at GetProducer. Normally I would not even consider having dependencies there. The objects should be POCOs, nothing more. I would really need some new inputs on this one. How can I do it instead? Is this the best way?
We also need to resolve the opposite, ie, from a producer that is cached we should be able to retrieve all its articles.
First, i wish to say, there are actually some (one?) solutions that uses entity framework code first in combination with caching using postsharp. Ideablades has released Devforce code first that actually is doing exactly this. That kind of framework actually resolves it all and we can use the entity framework as it is supposed to be used, and in combination with caching.
But that did not become the solution in this case. We went for complete separation of concern, meaning that the business objects only concern went to be only containing the data. The operations classes got the responsibility to fill the business objects.

MVVM - Deciding which ViewModel is responsible for what

I have a simple app that consists of:
Model
Items
Filter criteria applied to that list of items
Views
WelcomePage
MainItemsPage
FilterEditPage
I am using MVVM Light and Windows Phone 7
I currently have 3 ViewModels, one for each View. In the past I have had a single ViewModel which made the comunication which I am about to ask about very easy. However I wanted to go with the 3 seperate VMs as that seems to be the correct way.
The WelcomePage is able to set one of the Filter criteria before navigating to the MainItemsPage. The MainItemsPage is bound to an Items property that is exposed by its ViewModel. That ViewModel needs to have filtered that list depending on the current filter criteria. The FilterEditPage allows the user to edit the full criteria set of 4 variables. When the criteria is changed the Items collection used in the ViewModel for MainItemsPage needs to be refiltered.
The question is how I flow the Filter changes through the app. I know that MVVM has the concept of Messaging and the MVVM Light toolkit provides the Messenger class. However what I am struggling with is where does the responsibility lie for sending those messages?
Do the 3 VMs go to the Model whenever they need to work with the current Filter set?
Do all Filter updates go through the FilterEditViewModel and that in turn broadcasts a filter change message?
Do I go back to a single VM for all the Views?
I cannot see 1. working because something will need to trigger the VMs to go back to the Model
I know I can get 3. working right now with no problem. Is it that wrong?
TIA
Pat Long
I would put the shared current filter in the Model not the view model. You've got lots viewModels potentially on different pages or on the same page (consider a breadcrumb showing current selection and something else that needs to show a filter has been applied).
How about a singleton model for the Filter that view models can subscribe to?
Three VMs is the right way in your scenario. I suggest you to build a Parent/Child relation between you VMs. Since the the MainVM holds the ItemList, this is the place, where FilterChanges are applied. The FilterEditVM only receives the filter changes and than calls the MainVM, that it has to re-apply the filters.
The structure would be something like this:
public class WelcomePageVM
{
public WelcomePageVM()
{
this.FilterEditPageVM = new FilterEditPageVM(this);
this.MainItemsVM = new MainItemsVM(this);
}
public FilterEditPageVM FilterEditPageVM { get; private set; }
public MainItemsVM MainItemsVM { get; private set; }
public void SetInitialFilter1(object filter)
{
// the initial filter
this.FilterEditPageVM.Filter1Value = filter;
this.MainItemsVM.ApplyFilters();
}
}
public class FilterEditPageVM : ChildViewModelBase<WelcomePageVM>
{
public FilterEditPageVM(WelcomePageVM parent)
: base(parent) { }
public object Filter1Value { get; set; }
public object Filter2Value { get; set; }
public object Filter3Value { get; set; }
public object Filter4Value { get; set; }
public void FinishFilterChange()
{
this.Parent.MainItemsVM.ApplyFilters();
}
}
public class MainItemsVM : ChildViewModelBase<WelcomePageVM>
{
public MainItemsVM(WelcomePageVM parent)
: base(parent) { }
public List<object> ItemList { get; set; }
public void ApplyFilters()
{
// filter apply logic
}
}
public abstract class ChildViewModelBase<T>
{
T _parent;
public ChildViewModelBase(T parent)
{
this._parent = parent;
}
public T Parent { get { return _parent; } }
}
Here you can access all viewmodels, which is okay because you stay in the "controller" level.