MVVM Toolkit light Messenger chained Messages - mvvm

this might be complicated to explain but I give it a try...
I would like to use the Messenger to navigate to a new Page and also create a new Object (or pass one). How is this possible or am I on the wrong path?
Basically:
Click on "add new person" button which should bring up the PersonView and also should hold a new instance of a person object.
Click on "add person" button which should bring up the same PersonView page and should receives the object which is selected.
Message 1 = open Uri / Message 2 send exisiting or new object.
So far I have MainPageViewModel which sends
Messenger.Default.Send<Uri>(...)...
And MainPage.cs which Registers Messenger.Default.Register<Uri>(...)and executes
Frame.Navigate(...targetUri)....
I tryed to Send a message to the PersonViewModel right after Frame.Navigate... but this runs out of sync... so the page was not loaded to receive the PersonMessage,...
So any tips, tricks, licks, approaches would be greate...
Thanks...

Hope this helps, basicaly it is a simple Singleton class that gets the navigation frame the page that contains, after that you are able to use it in your viewmodel and navigate, and get notified when the page changes, so with this you control in a better way the navigation
and send messages, and get aware about your page status.
public class NavigationFrameController {
private static NavigationFrameController _instance;
private MainPage _root;
public Frame NavFrame { get; set;}
private static object keyLock = new Object();
NavigationFrameController() {
_root = (MainPage)Application.Current.RootVisual;
NavFrame = _root.ContentFrame;
NavFrame.Navigated += new NavigatedEventHandler(ContentFrame_Navigated);
NavFrame.NavigationFailed += new NavigationFailedEventHandler(ContentFrame_NavigationFailed);
}
public static NavigationFrameController Instance {
get {
if (_instance == null)
lock (keyLock) {
_instance = new NavigationFrameController();
}
return _instance;
}
}
public void NavigateTo(Uri uri) {
NavFrame.Source = uri;
}
private void ContentFrame_Navigated(object sender, NavigationEventArgs e) {
//send your message
// get attached to this event and get notified
}
private void ContentFrame_NavigationFailed(object sender, NavigationFailedEventArgs e) {
}

I had the same problem - essentially where you receive the message to open a new window also create the viewmodel and add it to the view as datacontext. When you instantiate your viewmodel pass in the existing object or null etc... then in your viewmodel you can handle whether its a new or existing object.
If you are using dependency injection then call a resolve from the codebehind where you process the 'add person' messsage etc..

I think what you should do is keep the first message for navigation, and add to it the information about the object (person) you want to send. you can add a parameter to the query string, say "add=true" and then you can create the object normally in the view model, or the ID of the object to edit, and in this case, the viewmodel can retrieve the object itself and edit it.
To achieve this, in the code behind of the PersonView (associated with the PersonViewModel) has to send a message upon navigation (OnNavigatedTo) to its ViewModel containing the received info from the query string.

Related

How to call a function(which works with UIElements) in View from ViewModel using MVVM pattern

I'm using MVVM Light Toolkit and in my View, I have a function that takes a screenshot and returns byte array of that screenshot. Since taking an screenshot (using UIElements) is related to view not ViewModel.
byte[] TakeScreenShot(Canvas sourceUiElement)
I need to get the return value of the function in my ViewModel but I can't come up with a proper way of doing it.
I other hand if I wanted to do move this function to my ViewModel, I need to have access to that element in view but without referencing the View in my ViewModel (maybe as argument or something to a Command?)
Since this question is tagged as MvvmLight, then here is an MvvmLight Toolkit answer. Use said toolkit's Messenger class. Simply define the following message classes somewhere in your application:
public class TakeScreenshotMessage : MessageBase { }
public class ScreenshotTakenMessage : GenericMessage<byte[]>
{
public ScreenshotTakenMessage (byte[]content) : base(content) { }
public ScreenshotTakenMessage (object sender, byte[]content) : base(sender, content) { }
public ScreenshotTakenMessage (object sender, object target, byte[]content) : base(sender, target, content) { }
}
In your code-behind's constructor, register for the TakeScreenshotMessage like this:
Messenger.Default.Register<TakeScreenshotMessage>(this, (msg) =>
{
byte[] bytes = this.TakeScreenShot(someCanvas);
Messenger.Default.Send(new ScreenshotTakenMessage(bytes));
});
And in your view model, register for the ScreenshotTakenMessage like this:
Messenger.Default.Register<ScreenshotTakenMessage>(this, (msg) =>
{
byte[] bytes = msg.Content.
//do something with your bytes
});
Now you can take a screen shot at any time simply by calling the following from anywhere in your application (i.e. view models, views, helper classes, etc.):
Messenger.Default.Send(new TakeScreenshotMessage());
I would bind the TakeScreenShot with the click event of the button or something in the code behind, have a property on the ViewModel called Snapshot for example, and in the click event, you get the byte[] array, assign it to the ViewModel's property Snapshot, like so in the code behind.
public void ButtonOnClick(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
var myViewModel = this.DataContext;
myViewModel.Snapshot = this.TakeScreenShot(someCanvas);
}
Depends on how strict you are with MVVM, and some might disagree, I think it is perfectly valid for your view to reference your viewmodel, aka you must know the context you are binding to anyways, but not the other way around. It is like manually binding to me.

Adding views does not call MEF Import statements

I have a view controlled by a view model (using MEF) that allows a user to selected items from a drop down list. Each item that the user selects populates a tab control that is defined as a region. The view model instantiates a view, assigns it a view model, then adds it to the region:
ProjectDetailView view = new ProjectDetailView();
ProjectDetailViewModel viewModel = new ProjectDetailViewModel();
viewModel.CurrentProject = project;
view.DataContext = viewModel;
RegionManager.Regions["SelectedItemsRegion"].Add(view);
This all works fine from the UI perspective. The project detail view model, however, has [Import] statements on it to receive an EventAggregator for publishing events.
[Import]
public IEventAggregator EventAggregator { get; set; }
Because I'm only adding views to a region and not doing a request navigate to a specific URI, the composition never occurs (or at least it doesn't appear to) so EventAggregator is always null. How do I get these dynamically added views to go through the process of importing the requested classes? Is there a compose method I can call on a specific view so things get resolved?
I would suggest that you create a factory class to instantiate EventAggregator, like so:
public EventAggregatorFactory
{
[Export(typeof(IEventAggregator))]
public IEventAggregator Instance
{
get
{
return new EventAggregator();
}
}
}
Obviously, move the Export declaration into the factory class. This should allow proper instantiation of the Import of EventAggregator when the viewmodel is invoked.

How can I use RequestFactory to create an object and initialize a collection whithin it with objects retrieved from another ReqFactory?

I am struggling with an issue using RequestFactory in GWT.
I have a User object : this object has login and password fields and other fields which are of collection type.
public class User {
private String login;
private String password;
private Set<Ressource> ressources;
// Getters and setters removed for brievety
}
I need to persist this object in db so I used RequestFactory because it seems like a CRUD-type operation to me.
Now for the RequestFactory part of the code, this is how I have tried to do it :
I create a UserRequestContext object to create a request object for the new User. Which gives something like :
public interface MyRequestFactory extends RequestFactory {
UserRequestContext userRequestContext();
RessourceRequestContext ressourceRequestContext();
}
and to create the user object I have something like this :
public class UserAddScreen extends Composite {
private UserProxy userProxy;
EventBus eventBus = new SimpleEventBus();
MyRequestFactory requestFactory = GWT.create(MyRequestFactory.class);
...
public UserAddScreen() {
...
requestFactory.initialize(eventBus);
}
public showUserAddScreen() {
// Textbox for password and login
// Listbox for ressources
}
}
I have tried to implement it as a wizard. So at the beginning of the UserAddScreen, I have a
a userProxy object.
This object fields are initialized at each step of the wizard :
the first step is adding the login and password
the second step is adding ressources to the userProxy object.
for this last step, I have two list boxes the first one containing the list of all the ressources i have in my DB table Ressources that I got from RessourceRequestContext.getAllRessource (I have a loop to display them as listbox item with the RessourceId as the value) and the second allows me to add the selected Ressources from this first listbox. Here is the first listbox :
final ListBox userRessourcesListBox = new ListBox(true);
Receiver<List<RessourceProxy>> receiver = new Receiver<List<RessourceProxy>>() {
#Override
public void onSuccess(List<RessourceProxy> response) {
for(RessourceProxy ressourceProxy : response) {
ressourcesListBox.addItem(ressourceProxy.getNom() + " " + ressourceProxy.getPrenom(), String.valueOf(ressourceProxy.getId()));
}
}
};
RessourceRequestContext request = requestFactory.ressourceRequestContext();
request.getAllRessource().fire(receiver);
So, as you can see, my code loops over the retrieved proxies from DB and initializes the items within the listbox.
Here are the control buttons :
final Button addButton = new Button(">");
addButton.addClickHandler(new ClickHandler() {
public void onClick(ClickEvent event) {
for (int i = 0; i < ressourcesListBox.getItemCount(); i++) {
boolean foundInUserRessources = false;
if (ressourcesListBox.isItemSelected(i)) {
for (int j = 0; j < userRessourcesListBox
.getItemCount(); j++) {
if (ressourcesListBox.getValue(i).equals(
userRessourcesListBox.getValue(j)))
foundInUserRessources = true;
}
if (foundInUserRessources == false)
userRessourcesListBox.addItem(ressourcesListBox
.getItemText(i), ressourcesListBox
.getValue(i));
}
}
}
});
So when somebody selects one or more users and click on a ">" button, all the selected items go to the second listbox which is named userRessourceListBox
userRessourcesListBox.setWidth("350px");
userRessourcesListBox.setHeight("180px");
After that, I have a FINISH button, which loops over the items in the second listbox (which are the ones I have selected from the first one) and I try to make a request (again) with RequestFactory to retrieve the ressourceProxy object and initialize the userProxy ressources collection with the result
final Button nextButton = new Button("Finish");
nextButton.addClickHandler(new ClickHandler() {
public void onClick(ClickEvent event) {
RessourceRequestContext request = requestFactory.ressourceRequestContext();
for(int i = 0; i < userRessourcesListBox.getItemCount(); i++) {
Receiver<RessourceProxy> receiver = new Receiver<RessourceProxy>() {
#Override
public void onSuccess(RessourceProxy response) {
userProxy.getRessource().add(response);
}
};
request.find(Long.parseLong(userRessourcesListBox.getValue(i))).fire(receiver);
}
creationRequest.save(newUserProxy).fire(new Receiver<Void>() {
#Override
public void onSuccess(Void response) {
Window.alert("Saved");
}
});
}
});
Finally, (in the code above) I try to save the UserProxy object (with the initial request context I have created userProxy with)... but it doesn't work
creationRequest.save(newUserProxy).fire(...)
It seems like when looping over the result in the onSuccess method :
userProxy.getRessource().add(response);
I retrieve the response (of type RessourceProxy) but beyond this method, for example when I try to save the userProxy object AFTER THE LOOP, there are no RessourceProxy objects in the ressourceProxy collection of userProxy...
Have you guys ever experienced something like this ?
Perhaps I am not doing it right : do I have to get the ressource with the UserRequestContext ? so that my newUser object and ressources are managed by the same request Context ?
if yes then I think it's a little bit weird to have something mixed together : I mean what is the benefit of having a Ressource-related operation in the User-related request context.
any help would be really really ... and I mean really appreciated ;-)
Thanks a lot
The message "… has been frozen" means that the object has been either edit()ed or passed as an argument to a service method, in another RequestContext instance (it doesn't matter whether it's of the same sub-type –i.e. UserRequestContext vs. RessourceRequestContext– or not) which hasn't yet been fire()d and/or the response has not yet come back from the server (or it came back with violations: when the receiver's onViolation is called, the objects are still editable, contrary to onSuccess and onFailure).
UPDATE: you have a race condition: you loop over the resource IDs and spawn as many requests as the number of items selected by the user, and then, without waiting for their response (remember: it's all asynchronous), you save the user proxy. As soon as you fire() that last request, the user proxy is no longer mutable (i.e. frozen).
IMO, you'd better keep the RessourceProxys retrieved initially and use them directly in the user proxy before saving it (i.e. no more find() request in the "finish" phase). Put them in a map by ID and get them from the map instead of finding them back from the server again.

how to parametrize an import in a View?

I am looking for some help and I hope that some good soul out there will be able to give me a hint :)
I am building a new application by using MVVM Light. In this application, when a View is created, it instantiates the corresponding ViewModel by using the MEF import.
Here is some code:
public partial class ContractEditorView : Window
{
public ContractEditorView ()
{
InitializeComponent();
CompositionInitializer.SatisfyImports(this);
}
[Import(ViewModelTypes.ContractEditorViewModel)]
public object ViewModel
{
set
{
DataContext = value;
}
}
}
And here is the export for the ViewModel:
[PartCreationPolicy(CreationPolicy.NonShared)]
[Export(ViewModelTypes.ContractEditorViewModel)]
public class ContractEditorViewModel: ViewModelBase
{
public ContractEditorViewModel()
{
_contract = new Models.Contract();
}
}
Now, this works if I want to open a new window in order to create a new contract... or in other words, it is perfect if I don't need to pass the ID of an existing contract.
However let's suppose I want to use the same View in order to edit an existing contract. In this case I would add a new constructor to the same View, which accepts either a model ID or a model object.
"Unfortunately" the ViewModel is created always in the same way:
[Import(ViewModelTypes.ContractEditorViewModel)]
public object ViewModel
{
set
{
DataContext = value;
}
}
As far as I know, this invokes the standard/no-parameters constructor of the corresponding ViewModel at composition-time.
So what I would like to know is how to differentiate this behavior? How can I call a specific constructor during composition time? Or how can I pass some parameters during the Import?
I really apologize if this question sounds silly, but I have only recently started to use MEF!
Thanks in advance,
Cheers,
Gianluca.
You CAN do this. Check out the Messenger implementation in MVVM-Light. You can pass a NotificationMessage(Of Integer) to send the right ID to the view model. The view model has to register for that type of message, and load it when a message is sent.
MEF Imports by default only have a parameterless constructor.

Simple ASP.NET MVC views without writing a controller

We're building a site that will have very minimal code, it's mostly just going to be a bunch of static pages served up. I know over time that will change and we'll want to swap in more dynamic information, so I've decided to go ahead and build a web application using ASP.NET MVC2 and the Spark view engine. There will be a couple of controllers that will have to do actual work (like in the /products area), but most of it will be static.
I want my designer to be able to build and modify the site without having to ask me to write a new controller or route every time they decide to add or move a page. So if he wants to add a "http://example.com/News" page he can just create a "News" folder under Views and put an index.spark page within it. Then later if he decides he wants a /News/Community page, he can drop a community.spark file within that folder and have it work.
I'm able to have a view without a specific action by making my controllers override HandleUnknownAction, but I still have to create a controller for each of these folders. It seems silly to have to add an empty controller and recompile every time they decide to add an area to the site.
Is there any way to make this easier, so I only have to write a controller and recompile if there's actual logic to be done? Some sort of "master" controller that will handle any requests where there was no specific controller defined?
You will have to write a route mapping for actual controller/actions and make sure the default has index as an action and the id is "catchall" and this will do it!
public class MvcApplication : System.Web.HttpApplication {
public static void RegisterRoutes(RouteCollection routes) {
routes.IgnoreRoute("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}");
routes.MapRoute(
"Default", // Route name
"{controller}/{action}/{id}", // URL with parameters
new { controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = "catchall" } // Parameter defaults
);
}
protected void Application_Start() {
AreaRegistration.RegisterAllAreas();
RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes);
ControllerBuilder.Current.SetControllerFactory(new CatchallControllerFactory());
}
}
public class CatchallController : Controller
{
public string PageName { get; set; }
//
// GET: /Catchall/
public ActionResult Index()
{
return View(PageName);
}
}
public class CatchallControllerFactory : IControllerFactory {
#region IControllerFactory Members
public IController CreateController(System.Web.Routing.RequestContext requestContext, string controllerName) {
if (requestContext.RouteData.Values["controller"].ToString() == "catchall") {
DefaultControllerFactory factory = new DefaultControllerFactory();
return factory.CreateController(requestContext, controllerName);
}
else {
CatchallController controller = new CatchallController();
controller.PageName = requestContext.RouteData.Values["action"].ToString();
return controller;
}
}
public void ReleaseController(IController controller) {
if (controller is IDisposable)
((IDisposable)controller).Dispose();
}
#endregion
}
This link might be help,
If you create cshtml in View\Public directory, It will appears on Web site with same name. I added also 404 page.
[HandleError]
public class PublicController : Controller
{
protected override void HandleUnknownAction(string actionName)
{
try
{
this.View(actionName).ExecuteResult(this.ControllerContext);
}
catch
{
this.View("404").ExecuteResult(this.ControllerContext);
}
}
}
Couldn't you create a separate controller for all the static pages and redirect everything (other than the actual controllers which do work) to it using MVC Routes, and include the path parameters? Then in that controller you could have logic to display the correct view based on the folder/path parameter sent to it by the routes.
Allthough I don't know the spark view engine handles things, does it have to compile the views? I'm really not sure.
Reflecting on Paul's answer. I'm not using any special view engines, but here is what I do:
1) Create a PublicController.cs.
// GET: /Public/
[AllowAnonymous]
public ActionResult Index(string name = "")
{
ViewEngineResult result = ViewEngines.Engines.FindView(ControllerContext, name, null);
// check if view name requested is not found
if (result == null || result.View == null)
{
return new HttpNotFoundResult();
}
// otherwise just return the view
return View(name);
}
2) Then create a Public directory in the Views folder, and put all of your views there that you want to be public. I personally needed this because I never knew if the client wanted to create more pages without having to recompile the code.
3) Then modify RouteConfig.cs to redirect to the Public/Index action.
routes.MapRoute(
name: "Public",
url: "{name}.cshtml", // your name will be the name of the view in the Public folder
defaults: new { controller = "Public", action = "Index" }
);
4) Then just reference it from your views like this:
YourPublicPage <!-- and this will point to Public/YourPublicPage.cshtml because of the routing we set up in step 3 -->
Not sure if this is any better than using a factory pattern, but it seems to me the easiest to implement and to understand.
I think you can create your own controller factory that will always instantiate the same controller class.