Search Results

Search found 895 results on 36 pages for 'viewmodel'.

Page 8/36 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

  • Keeping Linq to SQL alive when using ViewModels (ASP.NET MVC)

    - by Kohan
    I have recently started using custom ViewModels (For example, CustomerViewModel) public class CustomerViewModel { public IList<Customer> Customers{ get; set; } public int ProductId{ get; set; } public CustomerViewModel(IList<Customer> customers, int productId) { this.Customers= customers; this.ProductId= productId; } public CustomerViewModel() { } } ... and am now passing them to my view instead of the Entities themselves (for example, var Custs = repository.getAllCusts(id) ) as it seems good practice to do so. The problem i have encountered is that when using ViewModels; by the time it has got to the the view i have lost the ability to lazy load on customers. I do not believe this was the case before using them. Is it possible to retain the ability of Lazy Loading while still using ViewModels? Or do i have to eager load using this method? Thanks, Kohan.

    Read the article

  • DRY vs Security and Maintainability with MVC and View Models

    - by Mystere Man
    I like to strive for DRY, and obviously it's not always possible. However, I have to scratch my head over a concept that seems pretty common in MVC, that of the "View Model". The View Model is designed to only pass the minimum amount of information to the view, for both security, maintainability, and testing concerns. I get that. It makes sense. However, from a DRY perspective, a View Model is simply duplicating data you already have. The View Model may be temporary, and used only as a DTO, but you're basically maintaing two different versions of the same model which seems to violate the DRY principal. Do View Models violate DRY? Are they a necessary evil? Do they do more good than bad?

    Read the article

  • Passing contextual info to Views in ASP.NET MVC

    - by Andrey
    I wonder - what is the best way to supply contextual (i.e. not related to any particular view, but to all views at the same time) info to a view (or to master page)? Consider the following scenario. Suppose we have an app that supports multiple UI languages. User can switch them via UI's widgets (something like tabs at the top of the page). Each language is rendered as a separate tab. Tab for the current language should not be rendered. To address these requirements I'm planning to have a javascript piece that will hide current's language tab on the client. To do this, I need current's language tab Id on the client. So, I need some way of passing the Id to master page (for it to be 'fused' into the js script). The best thing I can think of is that all my ViewModels should inherit some ViewModeBase that has a field to hold current language tab Id. Then, whatever View I'm rendering, this Id will always be available for the master page's hiding script. However, I'm concerned that this ViewModelBase can potentially grow in an uncontrolled fashion as number of such pieces of contextual info (like current language) will grow.. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Passing Services to MainViewModel - SHOULD I use a dependency injection container ?

    - by msfanboy
    Hello, I have this code: public partial class App : Application { protected override void OnStartup(StartupEventArgs e) { base.OnStartup(e); var mainVM = new MainViewModel ( new Service1(), ... new Service10(), ); var window = new MainWindow(); window.DataContext = mainVM; window.Show(); } } I pass all my Services instances to the MainViewModel. Within the MainViewModel I spread those services to other ViewModels via constructor parameter passing. Should I use any DI framework for the services in the App class? If yes whats the benefit of resolving the services instead of just creating the instance manually... ?

    Read the article

  • How with lambda function in MVC3

    - by doogdeb
    I have a model which contains view models for each view. This model is held in session and is initialised when application starts. I need to be able to populate a field from one view model with the value from another so have used a lambda function. Below is my model. I am using a lambda so that when I get Test2.MyProperty it will use the FunctionTestProperty to retrieve the value from Test1.TestProperty. public class Model { public Model() { Test1 = new Test1() Test2 = new Test2(FunctionTestProperty () => Test1.TestProperty) } } public class Test1 { public string TestProperty { get; set; } } public class Test2 { public Test2() : this (() => string.Empty) {} public Test2(Func<string> functionTestProperty) { FunctionTestProperty = functionTestProperty; } public Func<string> FunctionTestProperty { get; set; } public string MyProperty { get{ return FunctionTestProperty() ?? string.Empty; } } } This works perfectly when I first run the application and navigate from Test1 to Test2; I can see that when I get the value for MyProperty it calls back to Model constructor and retrieves the Test1.TestProperty value. However when I then submit the form (Test2) it calls the default constructor which sets it to string.Empty. So if I go back to Test1 and back to Test2 again it always then calls the Test2 default constructor. Does anyone know why this works when first running the application but not after the view is submitted, or if I have made an obvious mistake?

    Read the article

  • Richmond Code Camp 2010.1 &ndash; Developing WPF Applications using Model-View-ViewModel

    - by John Blumenauer
    The code and slides from my Developing WPF Applications using Model-View-ViewModel session at Richmond Code Camp can be found HERE. During the session, a number of the attendees had some really great questions which tells me they’re really thinking about how to start using MVVM in their own apps.  I’ll be interested to hear feedback as they start investigating and introducing MVVM in their applications.  If you experience any problems downloading the slides or code, please let me know.

    Read the article

  • WPF MVVM: how to bind GridViewColumn to ViewModel-Collection?

    - by Sam
    In my View I got a ListView bound to a CollectionView in my ViewModel, for example like this: <ListView ItemsSource="{Binding MyCollection}" IsSynchronizedWithCurrentItem="true"> <ListView.View> <GridView> <GridViewColumn Header="Title" DisplayMemberBinding="{Binding Path=Title}"/> <GridViewColumn Header="Name" DisplayMemberBinding="{Binding Path=Name}"/> <GridViewColumn Header="Phone" DisplayMemberBinding="{Binding Path=Phone}"/> <GridViewColumn Header="E-mail" DisplayMemberBinding="{Binding Path=EMail}"/> </GridView> </ListView.View> </ListView> Right now these GridViewColumns are fixed, but I'd like to be able to change them from the ViewModel. I'd guess I'll have to bind the GridViewColumn-collection to something in the ViewModel, but what, and how? The ViewModel does know nothing of WPF, so I got no clue how to achieve this in MVVM. any help here?

    Read the article

  • How do you handle 'SelectedItemChanged' events in a MVVM ViewModel?

    - by Travis
    I have some logic that depends upon two properties being set, as it executes when both properties have a value. For example: private void DoCalc() { if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(Property1) || string.IsNullOrEmpty(Property2)) return; Property3 = Property1 + " " + Property2; } That code would need to be executed every time Property1 or Property2 changed, but I'm having trouble figuring out how to do it in a stylistically acceptable manner. Here are the choices as I see them: 1) Call method from ViewModel I don't have a problem with this conceptually, as the logic is still in the ViewModel - I'm not a 'No code-behind' nazi. However, the 'trigger' logic (when either property changes) is still in the UI layer, which I don't love. The codebehind would look like this: void ComboBox_Property1_SelectedItemChanged(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e) { viewModel.DoCalc(); } 2) Call method from Property Setter This approach seems the most 'pure', but it also seems ugly, as if the logic is hidden. It would look like this: public string Property1 { get {return property1;} set { if (property1 != value) { property1 = value; NotifyPropertyChanged("Property1"); DoCalc(); } } } 3) Hook into the PropertyChanged event I'm now thinking this might be the right approach, but it feels weird to hook into the property changed event in the implementing viewmodel. It would look something like this: public ViewModel() { this.PropertyChanged += new PropertyChangedEventHandler(ViewModel_PropertyChanged); } void ViewModel_PropertyChanged(object sender, PropertyChangedEventArgs e) { if (e.PropertyName == "Property1" || e.PropertyName == "Property2") { DoCalc(); } } So, my question is, if you were browsing through some source code with that requirement, which approach would you prefer to see implemented (and why?). Thanks for any input.

    Read the article

  • how to bind the click event of a button and the selecteditemchanged of a listbox to a viewmodel in m

    - by Michel
    Hi, i'm just starting with the mvvm model in Silverlight. In step 1 i got a listbox bound to my viewmodel, but now i want to propagate a click in a button and a selecteditemchanged of the listbox back to the viewmodel. I guess i have to bind the click event of the button and the selecteditemchanged of the listbox to 2 methods in my viewmodel somehow? For the selecteditemchanged of the listbox i think there must also be a 'return call' possible when the viewmodel tries to set the selecteditem to another value? i come from a asp.net (mvc) background, but can't figure out how to do it in silverlight.

    Read the article

  • WCF RIA Services DomainContext Abstraction Strategies–Say That 10 Times!

    - by dwahlin
    The DomainContext available with WCF RIA Services provides a lot of functionality that can help track object state and handle making calls from a Silverlight client to a DomainService. One of the questions I get quite often in our Silverlight training classes (and see often in various forums and other areas) is how the DomainContext can be abstracted out of ViewModel classes when using the MVVM pattern in Silverlight applications. It’s not something that’s super obvious at first especially if you don’t work with delegates a lot, but it can definitely be done. There are various techniques and strategies that can be used but I thought I’d share some of the core techniques I find useful. To start, let’s assume you have the following ViewModel class (this is from my Silverlight Firestarter talk available to watch online here if you’re interested in getting started with WCF RIA Services): public class AdminViewModel : ViewModelBase { BookClubContext _Context = new BookClubContext(); public AdminViewModel() { if (!DesignerProperties.IsInDesignTool) { LoadBooks(); } } private void LoadBooks() { _Context.Load(_Context.GetBooksQuery(), LoadBooksCallback, null); } private void LoadBooksCallback(LoadOperation<Book> books) { Books = new ObservableCollection<Book>(books.Entities); } } Notice that BookClubContext is being used directly in the ViewModel class. There’s nothing wrong with that of course, but if other ViewModel objects need to load books then code would be duplicated across classes. Plus, the ViewModel has direct knowledge of how to load data and I like to make it more loosely-coupled. To do this I create what I call a “Service Agent” class. This class is responsible for getting data from the DomainService and returning it to a ViewModel. It only knows how to get and return data but doesn’t know how data should be stored and isn’t used with data binding operations. An example of a simple ServiceAgent class is shown next. Notice that I’m using the Action<T> delegate to handle callbacks from the ServiceAgent to the ViewModel object. Because LoadBooks accepts an Action<ObservableCollection<Book>>, the callback method in the ViewModel must accept ObservableCollection<Book> as a parameter. The callback is initiated by calling the Invoke method exposed by Action<T>: public class ServiceAgent { BookClubContext _Context = new BookClubContext(); public void LoadBooks(Action<ObservableCollection<Book>> callback) { _Context.Load(_Context.GetBooksQuery(), LoadBooksCallback, callback); } public void LoadBooksCallback(LoadOperation<Book> lo) { //Check for errors of course...keeping this brief var books = new ObservableCollection<Book>(lo.Entities); var action = (Action<ObservableCollection<Book>>)lo.UserState; action.Invoke(books); } } This can be simplified by taking advantage of lambda expressions. Notice that in the following code I don’t have a separate callback method and don’t have to worry about passing any user state or casting any user state (the user state is the 3rd parameter in the _Context.Load method call shown above). public class ServiceAgent { BookClubContext _Context = new BookClubContext(); public void LoadBooks(Action<ObservableCollection<Book>> callback) { _Context.Load(_Context.GetBooksQuery(), (lo) => { var books = new ObservableCollection<Book>(lo.Entities); callback.Invoke(books); }, null); } } A ViewModel class can then call into the ServiceAgent to retrieve books yet never know anything about the DomainContext object or even know how data is loaded behind the scenes: public class AdminViewModel : ViewModelBase { ServiceAgent _ServiceAgent = new ServiceAgent(); public AdminViewModel() { if (!DesignerProperties.IsInDesignTool) { LoadBooks(); } } private void LoadBooks() { _ServiceAgent.LoadBooks(LoadBooksCallback); } private void LoadBooksCallback(ObservableCollection<Book> books) { Books = books } } You could also handle the LoadBooksCallback method using a lambda if you wanted to minimize code just like I did earlier with the LoadBooks method in the ServiceAgent class.  If you’re into Dependency Injection (DI), you could create an interface for the ServiceAgent type, reference it in the ViewModel and then inject in the object to use at runtime. There are certainly other techniques and strategies that can be used, but the code shown here provides an introductory look at the topic that should help get you started abstracting the DomainContext out of your ViewModel classes when using WCF RIA Services in Silverlight applications.

    Read the article

  • How can I change the VisualState in a View from the ViewModel?

    - by Decker
    I'm new to WPF and MVVM. I think this is a simple question. My ViewModel is performing an asynch call to obtain data for a DataGrid which is bound to an ObservableCollection in the ViewModel. When the data is loaded, I set the proper ViewModel property and the DataGrid displays the data with no problem. However, I want to introduce a visual cue for the user that the data is loading. So, using Blend, I added this to my markup: <VisualStateManager.VisualStateGroups> <VisualStateGroup x:Name="LoadingStateGroup"> <VisualState x:Name="HistoryLoading"> <Storyboard> <ObjectAnimationUsingKeyFrames Storyboard.TargetProperty="(UIElement.Visibility)" Storyboard.TargetName="HistoryGrid"> <DiscreteObjectKeyFrame KeyTime="0" Value="{x:Static Visibility.Hidden}"/> </ObjectAnimationUsingKeyFrames> </Storyboard> </VisualState> <VisualState x:Name="HistoryLoaded"> <Storyboard> <ObjectAnimationUsingKeyFrames Storyboard.TargetProperty="(UIElement.Visibility)" Storyboard.TargetName="WorkingStackPanel"> <DiscreteObjectKeyFrame KeyTime="0" Value="{x:Static Visibility.Hidden}"/> </ObjectAnimationUsingKeyFrames> </Storyboard> </VisualState> </VisualStateGroup> </VisualStateManager.VisualStateGroups> I think I know how to change the state in my code-behind (something similar to this): VisualStateManager.GoToElementState(LayoutRoot, "HistoryLoaded", true); However, the place where I want to do this is in the I/O completion method of my ViewModel which does not have a reference to it's corresponding View. How would I accomplish this using the MVVM pattern?

    Read the article

  • Adventures in MVVM &ndash; My ViewModel Base &ndash; Silverlight Support!

    - by Brian Genisio's House Of Bilz
    More Adventures in MVVM In my last post, I outlined the powerful features that are available in the ViewModelSupport.  It takes advantage of the dynamic features of C# 4.0 (as well as some 3.0 goodies) to help eliminate the plumbing that often comes with writing ViewModels.  If you are interested in learning about the capabilities, please take a look at that post and look at the code on CodePlex.  When I wrote about the ViewModel base class, I complained that the features did not work in Silverlight because as of 4.0, it does not support binding to dynamic properties.  Although I still think this is a bummer, I am happy to say that I have come up with a workaround.  In the Silverlight version of my base class, I include a PropertyCollectionConverter that lets you bind to dynamic properties in the ViewModelBase, especially the convention-based commands that the base class supports. To take advantage of any properties that are not statically defined, you can bind to the Properties property of the ViewModel and pass in a converter parameter for the name of the property you want to bind. For example, a ViewModel that looks like this: public class ExampleViewModel : ViewModelBase { public void Execute_MyCommand() { Set("Text", "Foo"); } } Can bind to the dynamic property and the convention-based command with the following XAML. <TextBlock Text="{Binding Properties, Converter={StaticResource PropertiesConverter}, ConverterParameter=Text}" Margin="5" /> <Button Content="Execute MyCommand" Command="{Binding Properties, Converter={StaticResource PropertiesConverter}, ConverterParameter=MyCommand}" Margin="5" /> Of course, it is not as pretty as binding to Text and MyCommand like you can in WPF.  But, it is better than having a failed feature.  This allows you to share your ViewModels between WPF and Silverlight very easily.  <BeatDeadHorse>Hopefully, in Silverlight 5.0, we will see binding to dynamic properties more directly????</BeatDeadHorse>

    Read the article

  • View / ViewModel - what is the sense (in a WPF control)?

    - by TomTom
    Not as funny as it sounds. Normally the View / ViewModel should decouple the presentation from the business logic. Good. Now, a Control in WPF is basically invisible unless made different (with the exceptions of UserControl and Window that have XAML directly attached). The Style is putting in the "visual presentation" - which basically means a Control does not need a view mechanism as WPF already has one? In addition. the ViewModel is actually part of the Control, or? Just fighting with that stuff. I know in ASP.NET, WinForms the separation makes a lot of sense - but there, basically, controls HAVE an intrinsic look. In WPF, I have some where it makes sense (derived from UserControl), but for the majority of the controls I write, the View & ViewModel look like pretty much totally superflous thanks to the already presenting view mechanism.

    Read the article

  • Silverlight child windows in MVVM pattern

    - by rrejc
    Hello, I am trying to find the right way to get the data from a ChildWindow/popup using a MVVM pattern in Silverlight (3). For example: I have a main page with a data entry form and I want to open a popup with a list of customers. When user selects a customer I want to transfer selected customer into the main page. This is what the (example) code which I am using at the moment: Main page public partial class MainPage : UserControl { public MainPageViewModel ViewModel { get; private set; } public MainPage() { InitializeComponent(); ViewModel = new MainPageViewModel(); DataContext = ViewModel; } private void SearchCustomer_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e) { ViewModel.SearchCustomer(); } } public class MainPageViewModel: ViewModel { private string customer; public string Customer { get { return customer; } set { customer = value; RaisePropertyChanged("Customer"); } } public void SearchCustomer() { // Called from a view SearchWindow searchWindow = new SearchWindow(); searchWindow.Closed += (sender, e) => { if ((bool)searchWindow.DialogResult) { Customer = searchWindow.ViewModel.SelectedCustomer.ToString(); } }; searchWindow.Show(); } } Child window public partial class SearchWindow : ChildWindow { public SearchWindowViewModel ViewModel { get; private set; } public SearchWindow() { InitializeComponent(); ViewModel = new SearchWindowViewModel(); DataContext = ViewModel; } private void OKButton_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e) { DialogResult = ViewModel.OkButtonClick(); } private void CancelButton_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e) { DialogResult = ViewModel.CancelButtonClick(); } } public class SearchWindowViewModel: ViewModel { private Customer selectedCustomer; private ObservableCollection<Customer> customers; public ObservableCollection<Customer> Customers { get { return customers; } set {customers = value; RaisePropertyChanged("Customers"); } } public Customer SelectedCustomer { get { return selectedCustomer; } set { selectedCustomer = value; RaisePropertyChanged("SelectedCustomer"); } } public SearchWindowViewModel() { Customers = new ObservableCollection<Customer>(); ISearchService searchService = new FakeSearchService(); foreach (Customer customer in searchService.FindCustomers("dummy")) Customers.Add(customer); } public bool? OkButtonClick() { if (SelectedCustomer != null) return true; else return null; // show some error message before that } public bool? CancelButtonClick() { return false; } } Is this the right way or is there anything more "simple"? Cheers, Rok

    Read the article

  • In MVVM should the ViewModel or Model implement INotifyPropertyChanged?

    - by Edward Tanguay
    Most MVVM examples I have worked through have had the Model implement INotifyPropertyChanged, but in Josh Smith's CommandSink example the ViewModel implements INotifyPropertyChanged. I'm still cognitively putting together the MVVM concepts, so I don't know if: you have to put the INotifyPropertyChanged in the ViewModel to get CommandSink to work this is just an aberration of the norm and it doesn't really matter you should always have the Model implement INotifyPropertyChanged and this is just a mistake which would be corrected if this were developed from a code example to an application What have been others' experiences on MVVM projects you have worked on?

    Read the article

  • Can I remove duplicating events in EventAggregator?

    - by Mcad001
    Hi, I have a quite simple scenario that I cannot get to work correctly. I have 2 views, CarView and CarWindowView (childwindow) with corresponding ViewModels. In my CarView I have an EditButton that that opens CarWindowView (childwindow) where I can edit the Car object fields. My problem is that the DisplayModule method in my CarWindowView ViewModel is getting called too many times...When I push the edit button first time its getting called once, the second time its getting called twince, the third time its getting called 3 times and so fort... ! CarView ViewModel constructor: Public Sub New(ByVal eventAggregator As IEventAggregator, ByVal con As IUnityContainer, ByVal mgr As ICarManager, ByVal CarService As ICarService) _Container = con _CarManager = mgr _EventAggregator = eventAggregator 'Create the DelegateCommands NewBtnClick = New DelegateCommand(Of Object)(AddressOf HandleNewCarBtnClick) EditBtnClick = New DelegateCommand(Of Object)(AddressOf HandleEditCarBtnClick) End Sub CarView ViewModel HandleEditCarBtnClick method: Private Sub HandleEditCarBtnClick() Dim view = New CarWindowView Dim viewModel = _Container.Resolve(Of CarWindowViewModel)() viewModel.CurrentDomainContext = DomainContext viewModel.CurrentItem = CurrentItem viewModel.IsEnabled = False view.ApplyModel(viewModel) view.Show() _EventAggregator.GetEvent(Of CarCollectionEvent)().Publish(EditObject) End Sub CarWindowView ViewModel constructor: Public Sub New(ByVal eventAggregator As IEventAggregator, ByVal con As IUnityContainer, ByVal mgr As ICarManager, ByVal CarService As ICarService) _Container = con _CarManager = mgr _EventAggregator = eventAggregator _EventAggregator.GetEvent(Of CarCollectionEvent).Subscribe(AddressOf DisplayModule) End Sub CarWindowView ViewModel DisplayModule method (this is the method getting called too many times): Public Sub DisplayModule(ByVal param As String) If param = EditObject Then IsInEditMode = True ' Logic removed for display reasons here. This logic breaks because it's called too many times. End If End Sub So, I cannot understand how I can only have the EventAggregator to store just the one single click, and not all my click on the Edit button. Sorry if this is not to well explained! Help appreciated!!

    Read the article

  • With MVVM, does each UI window have its own ViewModel?

    - by j0rd4n
    When I'm designing multiple views under the MVVM pattern, does each view get its own ViewModel or do they all share the same one? I understand that this is ultimately a flexible decision, but what is the best practice? My gut tells me to have a ViewModel for each view (i.e. each separate UI window). All of the blog examples of MVVM show a single view but not much beyond that.

    Read the article

  • how to create and track multiple pairs "View-ViewModel"?

    - by Gianluca Colucci
    Hi! I am building an application that is based on MVVM-Light. I am in the need of creating multiple instances of the same View, and each one should bind to its own ViewModel. The default ViewModelLocator implements ViewModels as singletons, therefore different instances of the same View will bind to the same ViewModel. I could create the ViewModel in the VMLocator as a non-static object (as simple as returning new VM()...), but that would only partially help me. In fact, I still need to keep track of the opened windows. Nevertheless, each window might open several other windows (of a different kind, though). In this situation I might need to execute some operation on the parent View and all its children. For example before closing the View P, I might want to close all its children (view C1, view C2, etc.). Hence, is there any simple and easy way to achieve this? Or is there any best practice you would advice me to follow? Thanks in advance for your precious help. Cheers, Gianluca.

    Read the article

  • MVVM: where is the best place to integrate an id counter, in ViewModel or Repository or... ?

    - by msfanboy
    Hello, I am using http://loungerepo.codeplex.com/ this library needs a unique id when I persist my entities to the repository. I decided for integer not Guid. The question is now where do I retrieve a new integer and how do I do it? This is my current approach in the SchoolclassAdministrationViewModel.cs: public SchoolclassAdministrationViewModel() { _schoolclassRepo = new SchoolclassRepository(); _pupilRepo = new PupilRepository(); _subjectRepo = new SubjectRepository(); _currentSchoolclass = new SchoolclassModel(); _currentPupil = new PupilModel(); _currentSubject = new SubjectModel(); ... } private void AddSchoolclass() { // get the last free id for a schoolclass entity _currentSchoolclass.SchoolclassID = _schoolclassRepo.LastID; // add the new schoolclass entity to the repository _schoolclassRepo.Add(SchoolclassModel.SchoolclassModelToSchoolclass(_currentSchoolclass)); // add the new schoolclass entity to the ObservableCollection bound to the View Schoolclasses.Add(_currentSchoolclass); // Create a new schoolclass entity and the bound UI controls content gets cleaned CurrentSchoolclass = new SchoolclassModel(); } public class SchoolclassRepository : IRepository<Schoolclass> { private int _lastID; public SchoolclassRepository() { _lastID = FetchLastId(); } public void Add(Schoolclass entity) { //repo.Store(entity); } private int FetchLastId() { return // repo.GetIDOfLastEntryAndDoInc++ } public int LastID { get { return _lastID; } } } Explanation: Every time the user switches to the SchoolclassAdministrationViewModel which is datatemplated with a UserControl the saVM Ctor is called and the schoolclass repository is created wherein the FetchLastId() is called and I am up to date with the last ID doing a inc++ on it to get the free one... Do you have any better ideas? What I do not like about my current apporach: -Having a private method in repositry class because a repositry is to fetch data only not "entity logic" like the counter - Having to access from the ViewModel a public property - located in the repository -, actually its not the ViewModel concern to get a entity id and assign it. Actually the ViewModel should ask for a schoolclass POCO and get a SchoolclassModel to bind to the UI. But then I have again to re-read the Schoolclass properties into the SchoolclassModel properties what I want to avoid.

    Read the article

  • What is the best approach to binding commands in a ViewModel to elements in the View?

    - by Micah
    Anyone who has tried to implement RoutedCommands in WPF using M-V-VM has undoubtedly run into issues. Commands (non-UI commands that is) should be implemented in the ViewModel. For instance if I needed to save a CustomerViewModel then I would implement that as a command directly on my CustomerViewModel. However if I wanted to pop up a window to show the users addresses I would implement a ShowCustomerAddress command directly in the view since this a UI specific function. How do I define the command bindings in the viewmodel, and use them in the view?

    Read the article

  • Is it okay if my ViewModel 'creates' bindable user controls for my View?

    - by j0rd4n
    I have an entry-point View with a tab control. Each tab is going to have a user control embedded within it. Each embedded view inherits from the same base class and will need to be updated as a key field on the entry-point view is updated. I'm thinking the easiest way to design this page is to have the entry-point ViewModel create and expose a collection of the tabbed views so the entry-point View can just bind to the user control elements using a DataTemplate on the tab control. Is it okay for a ViewModel to instantiate and provide UI elements for its View?

    Read the article

  • I know I'm doing something wrong with RaiseCanExecuteChanged and CanExecute

    - by Cowman
    Well after fiddling with MVVM light to get my button to enable and disable when I want it to... I sort of mashed things together until it worked. However, I just know I'm doing something wrong here. I have RaiseCanExecuteChanged and CanExecute in the same area being called. Surely this is not how it's done? Here's my xaml <Button Margin="10, 25, 10, 25" VerticalAlignment="Center" HorizontalAlignment="Center" Width="50" Height="50" Grid.Column="1" Grid.Row="3" Content="Host"> <i:Interaction.Triggers> <i:EventTrigger EventName="Click"> <mvvmLight:EventToCommand Command="{Binding HostChat}" MustToggleIsEnabled="True" /> </i:EventTrigger> </i:Interaction.Triggers> </Button> And here's my code public override void InitializeViewAndViewModel() { view = UnityContainer.Resolve<LoginPromptView>(); viewModel = UnityContainer.Resolve<LoginPromptViewModel>(); view.DataContext = viewModel; InjectViewIntoRegion(RegionNames.PopUpRegion, view, true); viewModel.HostChat = new DelegateCommand(ExecuteHostChat, CanHostChat); viewModel.PropertyChanged += new System.ComponentModel.PropertyChangedEventHandler(ViewModelPropertyChanged); } void ViewModelPropertyChanged(object sender, System.ComponentModel.PropertyChangedEventArgs e) { if (e.PropertyName == "Name" || e.PropertyName == "Port" || e.PropertyName == "Address") { (viewModel.HostChat as DelegateCommand).RaiseCanExecuteChanged(); (viewModel.HostChat as DelegateCommand).CanExecute(); } } public void ExecuteHostChat() { } public bool CanHostChat() { if (String.IsNullOrEmpty(viewModel.Address) || String.IsNullOrEmpty(viewModel.Port) || String.IsNullOrEmpty(viewModel.Name)) { return false; } else return true; } See how these two are together? Surely that can't be right. I mean... it WORKS for me... but something seems wrong about it. Shouldn't RaiseCanExecuteChanged call CanExecute? It doesn't... and so if I don't have that CanExecute in there, my control never toggles its IsEnabled like I need it to. (viewModel.HostChat as DelegateCommand).RaiseCanExecuteChanged(); (viewModel.HostChat as DelegateCommand).CanExecute();

    Read the article

  • Synchronize DataGrid and DataForm in Silverlight 3

    - by SpiralGray
    I've been banging my head against the wall for a couple of days on this and it's time to ask for help. I've got a DataGrid and DataForm on the same UserControl. I'm using an MVVM approach so there is a single ViewModel for the UserControl. That ViewModel has a couple of properties that are relevant to this discussion: public ObservableCollection<VehicleViewModel> Vehicles { get; private set; } public VehicleViewModel SelectedVehicle { get { return selectedVehicle; } private set { selectedVehicle = value; OnPropertyChanged( "SelectedVehicle" ); } } In the XAML I've got the DataGrid and DataForm defined as follows: <data:DataGrid SelectionMode="Single" ItemsSource="{Binding Vehicles}" SelectedItem="{Binding SelectedVehicle, Mode=TwoWay}" AutoGenerateColumns="False" IsReadOnly="True"> <dataFormToolkit:DataForm CurrentItem="{Binding SelectedVehicle}" /> So as the SelectedItem changes on the DataGrid it should push that change back to the ViewModel and when the ViewModel raises the OnPropertyChanged the DataForm should refresh itself with the information for the newly-selected VehicleViewModel. However, the setter for SelectedVehicle is never being called and in the Output window of VS I'm seeing the following error: System.Windows.Data Error: ConvertBack cannot convert value 'xxxx.ViewModel.VehicleViewModel' (type 'xxxx.ViewModel.VehicleViewModel'). BindingExpression: Path='SelectedVehicle' DataItem='xxxx.ViewModel.MainViewModel' (HashCode=31664161); target element is 'System.Windows.Controls.DataGrid' (Name=''); target property is 'SelectedItem' (type 'System.Object').. System.MethodAccessException: xxxx.ViewModel.MainViewModel.set_SelectedVehicle(xxxx.ViewModel.VehicleViewModel) It sounds like it's having a problem converting from a VehicleViewModel to an object (or back again), but I'm confused as to why that would be (or even if I'm on the right track with that assumption). Each row/item in the DataGrid should be a VehicleViewModel (because the ItemsSource is bound to an ObservableCollection of that type), so when the SelectedItem changes it should be dealing with an instance of VehicleViewModel. Any insight would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • MEF CompositionInitializer for WPF

    - by Reed
    The Managed Extensibility Framework is an amazingly useful addition to the .NET Framework.  I was very excited to see System.ComponentModel.Composition added to the core framework.  Personally, I feel that MEF is one tool I’ve always been missing in my .NET development. Unfortunately, one perfect scenario for MEF tends to fall short of it’s full potential is in Windows Presentation Foundation development.  In particular, there are many times when the XAML parser constructs objects in WPF development, which makes composition of those parts difficult.  The current release of MEF (Preview Release 9) addresses this for Silverlight developers via System.ComponentModel.Composition.CompositionInitializer.  However, there is no equivalent class for WPF developers. The CompositionInitializer class provides the means for an object to compose itself.  This is very useful with WPF and Silverlight development, since it allows a View, such as a UserControl, to be generated via the standard XAML parser, and still automatically pull in the appropriate ViewModel in an extensible manner.  Glenn Block has demonstrated the usage for Silverlight in detail, but the same issues apply in WPF. As an example, let’s take a look at a very simple case.  Take the following XAML for a Window: <Window x:Class="WpfApplication1.MainView" xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation" xmlns:x="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml" Title="MainWindow" Height="220" Width="300"> <Grid> <TextBlock Text="{Binding TheText}" /> </Grid> </Window> This does nothing but create a Window, add a simple TextBlock control, and use it to display the value of our “TheText” property in our DataContext class.  Since this is our main window, WPF will automatically construct and display this Window, so we need to handle constructing the DataContext and setting it ourselves. We could do this in code or in XAML, but in order to do it directly, we would need to hard code the ViewModel type directly into our XAML code, or we would need to construct the ViewModel class and set it in the code behind.  Both have disadvantages, and the disadvantages grow if we’re using MEF to compose our ViewModel. Ideally, we’d like to be able to have MEF construct our ViewModel for us.  This way, it can provide any construction requirements for our ViewModel via [ImportingConstructor], and it can handle fully composing the imported properties on our ViewModel.  CompositionInitializer allows this to occur. We use CompositionInitializer within our View’s constructor, and use it for self-composition of our View.  Using CompositionInitializer, we can modify our code behind to: public partial class MainView : Window { public MainView() { InitializeComponent(); CompositionInitializer.SatisfyImports(this); } [Import("MainViewModel")] public object ViewModel { get { return this.DataContext; } set { this.DataContext = value; } } } We then can add an Export on our ViewModel class like so: [Export("MainViewModel")] public class MainViewModel { public string TheText { get { return "Hello World!"; } } } MEF will automatically compose our application, decoupling our ViewModel injection to the DataContext of our View until runtime.  When we run this, we’ll see: There are many other approaches for using MEF to wire up the extensible parts within your application, of course.  However, any time an object is going to be constructed by code outside of your control, CompositionInitializer allows us to continue to use MEF to satisfy the import requirements of that object. In order to use this from WPF, I’ve ported the code from MEF Preview 9 and Glenn Block’s (now obsolete) PartInitializer port to Windows Presentation Foundation.  There are some subtle changes from the Silverlight port, mainly to handle running in a desktop application context.  The default behavior of my port is to construct an AggregateCatalog containing a DirectoryCatalog set to the location of the entry assembly of the application.  In addition, if an “Extensions” folder exists under the entry assembly’s directory, a second DirectoryCatalog for that folder will be included.  This behavior can be overridden by specifying a CompositionContainer or one or more ComposablePartCatalogs to the System.ComponentModel.Composition.Hosting.CompositionHost static class prior to the first use of CompositionInitializer. Please download CompositionInitializer and CompositionHost for VS 2010 RC, and contact me with any feedback. Composition.Initialization.Desktop.zip Edit on 3/29: Glenn Block has since updated his version of CompositionInitializer (and ExportFactory<T>!), and made it available here: http://cid-f8b2fd72406fb218.skydrive.live.com/self.aspx/blog/Composition.Initialization.Desktop.zip This is a .NET 3.5 solution, and should soon be pushed to CodePlex, and made available on the main MEF site.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >