In reading about C#, I have come across the terms "data transfer type" and "data transfer object". This shows up around annonymous types, where a type is created on the fly to hold results, such as from LINQ. Are these two terms referring to the same thing ?
Thanks,
Scott
I think some more context would help here.
An anonymous type has method scope. So this means, it cannot be passed outside of it's method. Whereas a Data Transfer Object entire purpose in life is to be passed outside of it's method.
I suspect their creating Data Transfer Types through an anonymous type and then projecting this to a Data Transfer Object.
But yeah, including the sentence you found this term in would help.
The type is the description of the object, it's class and it's methods/properties/variables/...
while the object is an instance of the type.
For example:
// this describes the type Foo
public sealed class Foo
{
public int ID { get; set; }
/* ... */
}
// this is an object (instance) of foo
var fooInstance = new Foo() { ID = 4, };
Related
I'm trying to serialize data into / from my classes, derived from MonoBehaviour, which cannot be created from client code (e.g., with the new keyword), but rather must be created by a Unity3D-specific method, GameObject.AddComponent<T>(). How can I use the YamlDotNet framework to populate my classes with values without having to create an adapter for each one? Is there some sort of built-in adapter that I can configure, such that YamlDotNet doesn't instantiate the class it's trying to serialize to?
A typical file might contain a mapping of items, e.g.,
%YAML 1.1
%TAG !invt! _PathwaysEngine.Inventory.
%TAG !intf! _PathwaysEngine.Adventure.
---
Backpack_01: !invt!Item+yml
mass: 2
desc:
nouns: /^bag|(back)?pack|sack|container$/
description: |
Your backpack is only slightly worn, and...
rand_descriptions:
- "It's flaps twirl in the breeze."
- "You stare at it. You feel enriched."
MagLite_LR05: !invt!Lamp+yml
cost: 56
mass: 2
time: 5760
desc:
nouns: /^light|flashlight|maglite|lr_05$/
description: |
On the side of this flashlight is a label...
(Type "light" to turn it on and off.)
...
Where the tags are the fully specified class names of my Items, e.g., PathwaysEngine.Inventory.Lamp+yml, PathwaysEngine is the namespace I use for my game engine code, Inventory deals with items & whatnot, and Lamp+yml is how the compiler denotes a nested class, yml inside Lamp. Lamp+yml might look like this:
public partial class Lamp : Item, IWearable {
public new class yml : Item.yml {
public float time {get;set;}
public void Deserialize(Lamp o) {
base.Deserialize((Item) o);
o.time = time;
}
}
}
I call Deserialize() on all objects that derive from Thing from Awake(), i.e., once the MonoBehaviour classes exist in the game. Elsewhere, I've already created a pretty complicated Dictionary filled with objects of type Someclass+yml, and then Deserialize takes an instance of the real, runtime class Someclass and populates it with values. There's got to be a cleaner way to do this, right?
How can I:
Tell the Deserializer what my classes are?
See the second edit for a good solution for the above issue
Get the data without it attempting to create my MonoBehaviour-derived classes?
Edit: I've since worked at the problem, and have found out a good way of dealing with custom data (in my particular case of trying to parse regexes out of my data, and having them not be considered strings & therefore, un-castable to regex) is to use a IYamlTypeConverter for that particular string. Using YamlDotNet with Unity3D MonoBehaviours, however, is still an issue.
Another Edit: The above examples use a pretty ugly way of determining types. In my case, the best thing to do was to register the tags first with the deserializer, e.g.,
var pre = "tag:yaml.org,2002:";
var tags = new Dictionary<string,Type> {
{ "regex", typeof(Regex) },
{ "date", typeof(DateTime) },
{ "item", typeof(Item) }};
foreach (var tag in tags)
deserializer.RegisterTagMapping(
pre+tag.Key, tag.Value);
Then, I use the !!tag notation in the *.yml file, e.g.,
%YAML 1.1
---
Special Item: !!item
nouns: /thing|item|object/
someBoolean: true
Start Date: !!date 2015-12-17
some regex: !!regex /matches\s+whatever/
...
You can pass a custom implementation of IObjectFactory to the constructor of the Deserializer class. Every time the deserializer needs to create an instance of an object, it will use the IObjectFactory to create it.
Notice that your factory will be responsible for creating instances of every type that is deserialized. The easiest way to implement it is to create a decorator around DefaultObjectFactory, such as:
class UnityObjectFactory : IObjectFactory
{
private readonly DefaultObjectFactory DefaultFactory =
new DefaultObjectFactory();
public object Create(Type type)
{
// You can use specific types manually
if (type == typeof(MyCustomType))
{
return GameObject.AddComponent<MyCustomType>();
}
// Or use a marker interface
else if (typeof(IMyMarkerInterface).IsAssignableFrom(type))
{
return typeof(GameObject)
.GetMethod("AddComponent")
.MakeGenericMethod(type)
.Invoke();
}
// Delegate unknown types to the default factory
else
{
return DefaultFactory(type);
}
}
}
I want to create specific Object according to the type argument.
Pseudo code looks like this.
sub new {
my $type = shift;
if($type eq "S1") {$interface = X->new(); }
if($type eq "S2") {$interface = Y->new(); }
etc...
return $interface;
}
Options might be:
Substitute "package" name with $type argument. Requires package name coordination with $type.
Use Hash{S1 => X} in the Master constructor to select Value according to $type passed. Requires Hash maintenance when adding new
Object types.
I don't like any of above. Looking trully polimorphic way to accomplish that.
Thank You,
k
Your best option would likely be to use a factory pattern. A factory method takes the parameters for creating an instance of your class, then decides which object to instantiate and return from that. This can also make dependency injection easier for testing.
You'd probably be looking at something like this (in Java-esque code), with an employee object:
public class EmployeeFactory
{
public static create(String type)
{
switch (type) {
case type1:
return new EmployeeTypeOne();
case type2:
return new EmployeeTypeTwo();
default:
throw new Exception("Unrecognized type");
}
}
}
Your employees would inherit from a common interface or abstract class. You can use the factory to handle constructor parameters as well if you prefer, just try to keep things fairly reasonable (don't pass a million parameters - the factory should internally handle complex objects)
See http://refactoring.com/catalog/replaceConstructorWithFactoryMethod.html for more information.
You might like Module::PluginFinder for that. Create all your specific types in a specific namespace and give them each some identifying (constant? sub?) that the main dispatcher will then use to identify which class handles a given type.
I am starting studying OOP and I want to learn what constitutes a class. I am a little confused at how loosely some core elements are being used and thus adding to my confusion.
I have looked at the C++ class, the java class and I want to know enough to write my own pseudo class to help me understand.
For instance in this article I read this (.. class attribute (or class property, field, or data member)
I have seen rather well cut out questions that show that there is a difference between class property and class field for instance What is the difference between a Field and a Property in C#?
Depending on what language I am studying, is the definition of
Property
Fields
Class variables
Attributes
different from language to language?
"Fields", "class variables", and "attributes" are more-or-less the same - a low-level storage slot attached to an object. Each language's documentation might use a different term consistently, but most actual programmers use them interchangeably. (However, this also means some of the terms can be ambiguous, like "class variable" - which can be interpreted as "a variable of an instance of a given class", or "a variable of the class object itself" in a language where class objects are something you can manipulate directly.)
"Properties" are, in most languages I use, something else entirely - they're a way to attach custom behaviour to reading / writing a field. (Or to replace it.)
So in Java, the canonical example would be:
class Circle {
// The radius field
private double radius;
public Circle(double radius) {
this.radius = radius;
}
// The radius property
public double getRadius() {
return radius;
}
public void setRadius(double radius) {
// We're doing something else besides setting the field value in the
// property setter
System.out.println("Setting radius to " + radius);
this.radius = radius;
}
// The circumference property, which is read-only
public double getCircumference() {
// We're not even reading a field here.
return 2 * Math.PI * radius;
}
}
(Note that in Java, a property foo is a pair of accessor methods called getFoo() and setFoo() - or just the getter if the property is read-only.)
Another way of looking at this is that "properties" are an abstraction - a promise by an object to allow callers to get or set a piece of data. While "fields" etc. are one possible implementation of this abstraction. The values for getRadius() or getCircumference() in the above example could be stored directly, or they could be calculated, it doesn't matter to the caller; the setters might or might not have side effects; it doesn't matter to the caller.
I agree with you, there's a lot of unnecessary confusion due to the loose definitions and inconsistent use of many OO terms. The terms you're asking about are used somewhat interchangeably, but one could say some are more general than others (descending order): Property -> Attributes -> Class Variables -> Fields.
The following passages, extracted from "Object-Oriented Analysis and Design" by Grady Booch help clarify the subject. Firstly, it's important to understand the concept of state:
The state of an object encompasses all of the (usually static) properties of the object plus the current (usually dynamic) values of each of these properties. By properties, we mean the totality of the object's attributes and relationships with other objects.
OOP is quite generic regarding certain nomenclature, as it varies wildly from language to language:
The terms field (Object Pascal), instance variable (Smalltalk), member object (C++), and slot (CLOS) are interchangeable, meaning a repository for part of the state of an object. Collectively, they constitute the object's structure.
But the notation introduced by the author is precise:
An attribute denotes a part of an aggregate object, and so is used during analysis as well as design to express a singular property of the class. Using the language-independent syntax, an attribute may have a name, a class, or both, and optionally a default expression: A:C=E.
Class variable: Part of the state of a class. Collectively, the class variables of a class constitute its structure. A class variable is shared by all instances of the same class. In C++, a class variable is declared as a static member.
In summary:
Property is a broad concept used to denote a particular characteristic of a class, encompassing both its attributes and its relationships to other classes.
Attribute denotes a part of an aggregate object, and so is used during analysis as well as design to express a singular property of the class.
Class variable is an attribute defined in a class of which a single copy exists, regardless of how many instances of the class exist. So all instances of that class share its value as well as its declaration.
Field is a language-specific term for instance variable, that is, an attribute whose value is specific to each object.
I've been doing oop for more than 20 years, and I find that people often use different words for the same things. My understanding is that fields, class variables and attributes all mean the same thing. However, property is best described by the stackoverflow link that you included in your question.
Generally fields, methods, static methods, properties, attributes and class (or static variables) do not change on a language basis... Although the syntax will probably change on a per language basis, they will be function in the way you would expect across languages (expect terms like fields/data members to be used interchangably across languages)
In C#....
A field is a variable that exists for a given instance of a class.
eg.
public class BaseClass
{
// This is a field that might be different in each instance of a class
private int _field;
// This is a property that accesses a field
protected int GetField
{
get
{
return _field;
}
}
}
Fields have a "visibility" this determines what other classes can see the field, so in the above example a private field can only be used by the class that contains it, but the property accessor provides readonly access to the field by subclasses.
A property lets you get (sometimes called an accessor) or set (sometimes called a mutator) the value of field... Properties let you do a couple of things, prevent writing a field for example from outside the class, change the visibility of the field (eg private/protected/public). A mutator allows you to provide some custom logic before setting the value of a field
So properties are more like methods to get/set the value of a field but provide more functionality
eg.
public class BaseClass
{
// This is a field that might be different in each instance of a class
private int _field;
// This is a property that accesses a field, but since it's visibility
// is protected only subclasses will know about this property
// (and through it the field) - The field and property in this case
// will be hidden from other classes.
protected int GetField
{
// This is an accessor
get
{
return _field;
}
// This is a mutator
set
{
// This can perform some more logic
if (_field != value)
{
Console.WriteLine("The value of _field changed");
_field = value;
OnChanged; // Call some imaginary OnChange method
} else {
Console.WriteLine("The value of _field was not changed");
}
}
}
}
A class or static variable is a variable which is the same for all instances of a class..
So, for example, if you wanted a description for a class that description would be the same for all instance of the class and could be accessed by using the class
eg.
public class BaseClass
{
// A static (or class variable) can be accessed from anywhere by writing
// BaseClass.DESCRIPTION
public static string DESCRIPTION = "BaseClass";
}
public class TestClass
{
public void Test()
{
string BaseClassDescription = BaseClass.DESCRIPTION;
}
}
I'd be careful when using terminology relating to an attribute. In C# it is a class that can be applied to other classes or methods by "decorating" the class or method, in other context's it may simply refer to a field that a class contains.
// The functionality of this attribute will be documented somewhere
[Test]
public class TestClass
{
[TestMethod]
public void TestMethod()
{
}
}
Some languages do not have "Attributes" like C# does (see above)
Hopefully that all makes sense... Don't want to overload you!
Firstly, you need to select a language. For example, I would recommend you to select Ruby language and community. Until you select a language, you cannot escape confusion, as different communities use different terms for the same things.
For example, what is known as Module in Ruby, Java knows as abstract class. What is known as attributes in some languages, is known as instance variables in Ruby. I recommend Ruby especially for its logical and well-designed OOP system.
Write the following in a *.rb file, or on the command line in irb (interactive Ruby interpreter):
class Dog # <-- Here you define a class representing all dogs.
def breathe # <-- Here you teach your class a method: #breathe
puts "I'm breathing."
end
def speak # <-- Here you teach your class another method: #speak
puts "Bow wow!"
end
end
Now that you have a class, you can create an instance of it:
Seamus = Dog.new
You have just created an instance, a particular dog of class Dog, and stored it in the constant Seamus. Now you can play with it:
Seamus.breathe # <-- Invoking #breathe instance method of Seamus
#=> I'm breathing.
Seamus.speak # <-- Invoking #speak instance method of Seamus
#=> Bow wow!
As for your remaining terminology questions, "property" or "attribute" is understood as "variable" in Ruby, almost always an instance variable. And as for the term "data member", just forget about it. The term "field" is not really used in Ruby, and "class variable" in Ruby means something very rarely used, which you definitely don't need to know at this moment.
So, to keep the world nice and show you that OOP is really simple and painless in Ruby, let us create an attribute, or, in Ruby terminology, an instance variable of Dog class. As we know, every dog has some weight, and different dogs may have different weights. So, upon creation of a new dog, we will require the user to tell us dog's weight:
class Dog
def initialize( weight ) # <-- Defining initialization method with one argument 'weight'
#weight = weight # <-- Setting the dog's attribute (instance variable)
end
attr_reader :weight # <-- Making the dog's weight attribute visible to the world.
end
Drooly = Dog.new( 16 ) # <-- Weight now must provide weight upon initialization.
Drooly.weight # <-- Now we can ask Drooly about his weight.
#=> 16
Remember, with Ruby (or Python), things are simple.
I discovered in my question that Properties as defined in .Net are just a convenience syntax for code, and they are not tied to underlying variables at all (except for Auto-Implemented Properties, of course). So, saying "what is the difference between class property and class field" is like saying: what is the difference between a method and an attribute. No difference, one is code and the other is data. And, they need not have anything to do with each other.
It is really too bad that the same words, like "attribute" and "property", are re-used in different languages and ideologies to have starkly different meanings. Maybe someone needs to define an object-oriented language to talk about concepts in OOP? UML?
In The Class
public class ClassSample
{
private int ClassAttribute;
public int Property
{
get { return ClassAttribute; }
set { ClassAttribute = value; }
}
}
In the Program
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var objectSample = new ClassSample();
//Get Object Property
var GetProperty = objectSample.Property;
}
}
I'm trying to debug the following line:
MOrigValue.AllInstances.TestString = () => "New value";
There's a red squiggly line under:
() => "New value";
Mouseover shows the following error:
Delegate 'Microsoft.Moles.Framework.MolesDelegates.Func<OrigValueP.OrigValue, string>' does not take 0 arguments
Here is the complete class:
namespace OrigValueP
{
public class OrigValue
{
public string TestString() { return "Original value"; }
}
}
Here's the info from the object browser.
Click on the property MOrigValue.AllInstances.TestString:
public static Microsoft.Moles.Framework.MolesDelegates.Func<OrigValueP.OrigValue,string> TestString { set; }
Member of OrigValueP.Moles.MOrigValue.AllInstances
So, to a non-techie like me, that would explain the red squiggly line error above..
Click on the property MOrigValue..TestString:
public Microsoft.Moles.Framework.MolesDelegates.Func<string> TestString { set; }
Member of OrigValueP.Moles.MOrigValue
To me, this looks like the definition that I would have expected to see for MOrigValue.AllInstances.TestString. In other words a property that is actually a Moled "method" that has no parameters and returns a string.
As an experiment, based on the first object browser info above, I inserted the class as an input parameter, as follows:
MOrigValue.AllInstances.TestString = (OrigValue) => "New value";
This works :)
But my workaround looks like a "hack". I've seen every page on the internet (including StackOverflow) relating to moles and how to remove them painlessly. Many of them have lines with a lambda similar to the following:
MMyClass.AllInstances.DoSomething = () => "Hello world";
Assert.AreEqual("Hello world", new MyClass().DoSomething());
The fundamental issue is that Moles started from a method that takes no parameters and returns a string. The Moled equivalent takes its own class as a parameter and returns a string. Surely Moles knows that TestString() is a member of OrigValue.
Maybe my problem is a result of using VS Express, rather than the paid versions. I can live with that, but it would still be interesting to know why I need the hack. There might be cases where the hack produces incorrect test results without my knowledge.
BTW: I think this example proves the value of the object browser.
Your expectation is wrong. The "hack" you describe is the official documented way to use the AllInstances nested type. Its delegates really do always take a parameter containing an instance of the type under test.
It is unlikely that you could have seen this form of usage of AllInstances
MMyClass.AllInstances.DoSomething = () => "Hello world";
which, if you have, could be a mistake made by the author of the code.
What you expect to be the definition of a delegate belonging to the AllInstances type is really a different kind of use of Moles: it's used to detour an instance method of a single instance.
The "Mole Basics" section of the document "Microsoft Moles Reference Manual" contains more information on the topic. Here is an excerpt from there.
Instance Methods (for One Instance)
... The properties to set up those moles are instance methods of the mole type itself. Each instantiated mole type is also associated with a raw instance of a moled method type.
For example, given a class MyClass with an instance method MyMethod:
public class MyClass {
public int MyMethod() {
...
}
}
We can set up two mole types of MyMethod such that the first one always returns 5 and the second always returns 10:
var myClass1 = new MMyClass() { MyMethod = () => 5 };
var myClass2 = new MMyClass() { MyMethod = () => 10 };
I could use some really good links that explain Generics and how to use them. But I also have a very specific question, relater to working on a current project.
Given this class constructor:
public class SecuredDomainViewModel<TDomainContext, TEntity> : DomainViewModel<TDomainContext, TEntity>
where TDomainContext : DomainContext, new()
where TEntity : Entity, new()
public SecuredDomainViewModel(TDomainContext domainContext, ProtectedItem protectedItem)
: base(domainContext)
{
this.protectedItem = protectedItem;
}
And its creation this way:
DomainViewModel d;
d = new SecuredDomainViewModel<MyContext, MyEntityType>(this.context, selectedProtectedItem);
Assuming I have 20 different EntityTypes within MyContext, is there any easier way to call the constructor without a large switch statement?
Also, since d is DomainViewModel and I later need to access methods from SecuredDomainViewModel, it seems I need to do this:
if (((SecuredDomainViewModel<MyContext, MyEntityType>)d).CanEditEntity)
But again "MyEntityType" could actually be one of 20 diffent types. Is there anyway to write these types of statements where MyEntityType is returned from some sort of Reflection?
Additional Info for Clarification:
I will investigate ConstructorInfo, but I think I may have incorrectly described what I'm looking to do.
Assume I have the DomainViewModel, d in my original posting.
This may have been constructed via three possible ways:
d = new SecuredDomainViewModel<MyContext, Order>(this.context, selectedProtectedItem);
d = new SecuredDomainViewModel<MyContext, Invoice>(this.context, selectedProtectedItem);
d = new SecuredDomainViewModel<MyContext, Consumer>(this.context, selectedProtectedItem);
Later, I need to access methods on the SecuredDomainViewModel, which currently must be called this way:
ex: if (((SecuredDomainViewModel<MyContext, Order)d).CanEditEntity)
ex: if (((SecuredDomainViewModel<MyContext, Invoice)d).CanEditEntity)
ex: if (((SecuredDomainViewModel<MyContext, Consumer)d).CanEditEntity)
Assuming I have N+ entity types in this context, what I was hoping to be able to do is
something like this with one call:
ex: if (((SecuredDomainViewModel<MyContext, CurrentEntityType)d).CanEditEntity)
Where CurrentEntityType was some sort of function or other type of call that returned Order, Invoice or Consumer based on the current item entity type.
Is that possible?
You can create a non-generic interface that has the CanEditEntity property on it, make SecuredDomainViewModel inherit off that, then call the property through the interface...
Also, the new() constructor allows you to call a constructor on a generic type that has no arguments (so you can just write new TEntity()), but if you want to call a constructor that has parameters one handy trick I use is to pass it in as a delegate:
public void Method<T>(Func<string, bool, T> ctor) {
// ...
T newobj = ctor("foo", true);
// ...
}
//called later...
Method((s, b) => new MyClass(s, b));
I can't help on the links, and likely not on the type either.
Constructor
If you have the Type, you can get the constructor:
ConstructorInfo construtor = typeof(MyEntityType).GetConstructor(new object[]{TDomainContext, ProtectedItem});
Type
I'm not really sure what you're looking for, but I can only see something like
if (((SecuredDomainViewModel<MyContext, entityType>)d).CanEditEntity)
{
entityType=typeof(Orders)
}
being what you want.