Hi I Have a class derived from another class . Like this :
public class Customer
{
public string Date{ get; set; }
public string InstallationNo{ get; set; }
public string SerialNo { get; set; }
}
Then I have created a class named Customer_U which derived from Customer
public class Customer_U:Customer
{
public string Bill{ get; set; }
}
I have simple question. I have google many time but no answer. I have list filled with data like:
List<Customer_U> customer= new List<Customer_U>() I create a excel using this list. In excel colum order is like this :
Bill --- Date --- InstalltionNo --- SerialNo.
Idont want this order. I want "Bill" member to be last columns . How to set order of member when createin a class derived from another class
There is no defined order in a CLR class; it is up to the implementation that is inspecting the metadata of the class to determine how a class is interpreted.
For example, your Excel library is probably using reflection to inspect the class you pass it and reflection makes no guarantees as to the order in which things are processed.
Other implementations such as the WCF DataContractSerializer or ProtoBuf.NET handle order through the use of DataMember.
That said, if your library can handle dynamic or anonymous types then you can use the approach detailed in the other answers. .NET seems to consistently reflect these types in the same order that they were created.
var x = new { Z = "", Y = 1, X = true };
Console.WriteLine(x.GetType().GetProperties().Select(y => y.Name));
However it should be noted that this is an implementation detail and should not be relied upon. I'd see if you library allows you to specify the mapping between properties in your class and columns in your spreadsheet otherwise you might run into weird bugs in the future!
There is no ordering of class members in .NET. Whenever someone iterates over members in a class, they are imposing some order themselves.
The default seems to be shallow-first. So in your case, first all of Customer_U members are enumerated, and then Customer's.
If you do the enumeration yourself, there's nothing easier than simply using your own enumeration method:
class A
{
public string Date { get; set; }
public string SerialNo { get; set; }
}
class B : A
{
public string Bill { get; set; }
public string InstallationNo { get; set; }
}
public static IEnumerable<PropertyInfo> GetProperties(Type type)
{
if (type.BaseType == typeof(object)) return type.GetProperties().OrderBy(i => i.Name);
return GetProperties(type.BaseType)
.Concat
(
type
.GetProperties
(BindingFlags.DeclaredOnly | BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance)
.OrderBy(i => i.Name)
);
}
This simple recursive method will output
Date
SerialNo
Bill
InstallationNo
Deep-first, alphabetical. If you don't want the alphabetical sort, you can omit the OrderBys, but note that then the order is simply unspecified, not necessarily the order you used in your class.
You can use this when building your Excel, for example - if there's a way to impose an order in the output data. If there's no way to impose your own order in whatever you're using to output your data, you could do a mapping to a new object based on this data, and hope that it turns out well - however, doing this dynamically is actually quite a bit of work.
As the other answers have pointed out, there is no such thing as a defined order for class properties in .NET.
However, it seems that what you are looking for is not an ordering of the properties themselves, but in fact a way to sort the properties when serializing the objects, e.g. to Excel.
This IS easily implemented using classes from the System.Runtime.Serialization namespace. There are various classes there that could help you control the serialization process, and allow you to be as specific as you want.
The simplest solution would likely be simply applying the DataMember attribute:
[DataContract]
public class Customer
{
[DataMember(Order = 1)]
public string Date{ get; set; }
[DataMember(Order = 2)]
public string InstallationNo{ get; set; }
[DataMember(Order = 3)]
public string SerialNo { get; set; }
}
You can create a new anonymous class using linq:
var x = from costumerItem in YourList
select new { Date = costumerItem.Date, ...and so on };
Afterwards, move this class to the excel.
Create a wrapper list like
var reOrderedCustomer = Customer.select(a => new { a.Date, a.InstallationNo ,
a.SerialNo, a.Bill }).ToList()
Or do this in your first select method which fills Customer list (If you want to avoid anonymous type)
Related
Is it possible to obtain the value from (lets say a string property) of a class from a custom attribute?
For example:
public class test
{
[EncodeHTML]
public string body { get; set; }
public int id { get; set; }
}
I would want the custom attribute EncodeHTML to be able to obtain the value of the setting value of the "body" property.
I know this can be achieved via the following:
public string body
{
get;
set {
value = HttpUtility.HTMLEncode(this);
}
But was wondering if this could be isolated for re-use across many class properties.
Here is a plain example of the custom attribute:
[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Property, Inherited = true, AllowMultiple = false)]
sealed class EncodeHTMLAttribute : Attribute
{
public EncodeHTMLAttribute()
{
}
}
It is
var attr = typeof(test).GetProperty("body").GetCustomAttribute<EncodeHTMLAttribute>()
and you can access whatever you want.
To answer the question directly - no, the attributes are just metadata. They have no idea that a runtime instance of the decorated type even exist.
The closest you could do with an attribute is, at runtime, right when the app starts, find all types that have properties marked with that attribute and rewrite the setters code to what you want. It can be done in theory, but is hard, crazy, irresponsible and completely not recommended. Refer to this SO question to jump into the rabbit hole.
Having that said, to solve the underlying problem, you can just make a custom wrapper on a string.
public class HtmlEncodedString
{
public string Value { get; }
public HtmlEncodedString(string value) =>
Value = HttpUtility.HtmlEncode(value);
public static implicit operator string(HtmlEncodedString htmlEncodedString) =>
htmlEncodedString.Value;
public static implicit operator HtmlEncodedString(string value) =>
new HtmlEncodedString(value);
}
That's of course only a sketch. If you're using ASP.NET Core, consider implementing IHtmlContent. If you're allocating a lot of these, maybe making it a value type will decrease the pressure on the GC. Neverminding these details, you now can get reusability by just using this type instead of an attribute on a string.
public class Test
{
public HtmlEncodedString Body { get; set; }
public int Id { get; set; }
}
Because of the implicit operators, transition is seemless:
var test = new Test();
test.Body = "2 < 4";
string s = test.Body;
Console.WriteLine(s);
Console.WriteLine(test.Body);
> 2 < 4
> 2 < 4
Some sample code below. The interesting/problem case is the Data property in
Mad. This code blows up (null value in the enumerable). Also, it works if i don't use the static attributes but instead the runtime type model, where i put in member.SupportNull = true for the fields (which is the behaviour i want), so what am i missing in the attributes / settings? Google search seems to indicate this is an open issue with probuf-net? That the same functionality is not available via attributes?
As as aside, if someone could suggest a way - i really love the runtime type model, i want to use that everywhere with a nice compiled model... but with it i lose the object versioning that protocol buffers solves! (via explicit tags). Is there any good way to maintain object version compatibility (simply adding fields) without doing all the static notation with fixed tags?
Basically the key thing with the runtime model is the assignment of tag indices and i can't think of a way of handling versions without explicitly specifying the tag indices via attributes...
[ProtoContract]
[ProtoInclude(1, typeof(ing))]
public class Eff
{
[ProtoMember(2)]
public string gg { get; set; }
}
[ProtoContract]
public class ing : Eff
{
[ProtoMember(1)]
public int zz { get; set; }
}
[ProtoContract]
public class Mad
{
[ProtoMember(1)]
public string Name { get; set; }
[ProtoMember(2)]
public IEnumerable<ing> Data { get; set; }
[ProtoMember(3)]
public ing Single { get; set; }
}
private static void Main(string[] args)
{
var obj = new Mad
{
Name = "test"
,Data = new[] { new ing {gg = "ooga", zz = -101},null,new ing()}
,Single = new ing {gg = "abc", zz = -999}
};
var m = new MemoryStream();
Serializer.Serialize(m, obj);
m.Seek(0, SeekOrigin.Begin);
var copy = Serializer.Deserialize<Mad>(m);
}
Short answer, it seems unavailable via attributes.
Workaround i'm doing for now - for every single type of interest(including the whole inheritance hierarchy) - add it to the type model yourself (with default handling so that it processes attributes), then call .GetFields() and set .SupportNull = true for each field (or only the relevant one)
Lately I've worked on some programs that involve translating objects across various data domains. So I have a lot of mapping methods (sometimes as extension methods) for translating one type of object to another similar type in a different domain. Often, I also need a way to translate a List<> to a List<> of said types. This always involves having a method that simply creates a List<> of the target type, runs a foreach loop to add every element of the source List<> (but using the mapping method on each) and returning the new list. It's feeling pretty repetitive and like there might be something built into the language to do this (perhaps in LINQ?). I've looked at several similar issues involving List.ForEach() and the pros and cons of it (not what I'm looking for anyway). I'll illustrate with some example code below. Maybe there is no way to do what I want, and if that's the answer, then that's the answer, but I hope maybe there is. Please note, this is obviously just example code and comments about my overall program design won't really add anything because this is a very small dummy version of the problem at hand.
class A
{
public Guid Id { get; set; }
public string Email { get; set; }
public string MemberCode { get; set; }
}
class B
{
public string Email { get; set; }
public string MemberCode { get; set; }
// My custom mapping method
public A MapToA()
{
return new A()
{
Id = Guid.NewGuid(),
Email = this.Email,
MemberCode = this.MemberCode
};
}
// For list mapping, I have this, but I'd prefer
// to do something else that could utilize my custom mapper.
// Perhaps a built in LINQ method?
public static List<A> MapToListOfA(List<B> listOfB)
{
List<A> listOfA = new List<A>();
foreach (var b in listOfB)
{
listOfA.Add(b.MapToA());
}
return listOfA;
}
}
// Class C shows what I currently do that I'd like to get
// away from:
class C
{
public List<A> ListOfA { get; set; }
// other properties unrelated to the problem
// This is how I might use the MapToListOfA method,
// but I'd rather have something better.
public C(List<B> listOfB)
{
this.ListOfA = B.MapToListOfA(listOfB);
}
}
// I'd like something more like this:
class D
{
public List<A> ListOfA { get; set; }
// other properties unrelated to the problem
public D(List<B> listOfB)
{
// This doesn't compile, of course, but I hope
// it illustrates what I'm intending to do:
this.ListOfA = listOfB.Select(b => b.MapToA());
}
}
// This doesn't compile, of course, but I hope
// it illustrates what I'm intending to do:
this.ListOfA = listOfB.Select(b => b.MapToA());
It doesn't compile because listOfB.Select(b => b.MapToA()) produces an instance of IEnumerable<A> which is not assignable to List<A>.
Use ToList and it should compile fine
this.ListOfA = listOfB.Select(b => b.MapToA()).ToList();
We can pass data between functions by using class objects. Like i have class
public class AddsBean
{
public long addId{get;set;}
public int bid { get; set; }
public long pointsAlloted { get; set; }
public string userId { get; set; }
public enum isApproved { YES, NO };
public DateTime approveDate { get; set; }
public string title { get; set; }
public string description { get; set; }
public string Link { get; set; }
public DateTime dateAdded { get; set; }
}
We can call function like public List<AddsBean> getAdds(string Id). This approach is good when you need all the variables of class. But what if you need only 2 or 3 variables of class?
Passing object of class is not good because it will be wastage of memory. Another possible solution is to make different classes of lesser variables but that is not practical.
What should we do that will best possible solution to fulfill motive and best according to performance also?
In Java - "References to objects are passed by value".. So, you dont pass the entire object, you just pass the reference to the object to the called function.
EG:
class A{
int i;
int j;
double k;
}
class B{
public static void someFunc(A a) // here 'a' is a reference to an object, we dont pass the object.
{
// some code
}
public static void main(String[] args){
A a = new A();
B.someFunc(a); // reference is being passed by value
}
}
first of all, as Java is pass by value and references typed, there is no need to worry about the memory wastage.
next, as you have mentioned, it is not good to pass all the object if you do not need them all, in some situation, it's true. as you need to protect your data in instance, thus you can use different granularity of class, for instance:
class A
{id, name}
class B extends A
{password,birthday}
by refer to different class you can control the granularity yourself, and provide different client with different scope of data.
But in some condition, you need to use a instance to store all data in the whole application, like configure data in hadoop, or some other configuration related instance.
Try to choose the most suitable scope!
If you're sure that this is the source of problems and you don't want to define a new class with a subset of the properties, .NET provides the Tuple class for grouping a small number of related fields. For example, a Tuple<int, int, string> contains two integers and a string, in that order.
public Tuple<string, long, DateTime> GetPointsData()
{
AddsBean bean = ... // Get your AddsBean somehow
return Tuple.Create<string, long, DateTime>(bean.userId, bean.pointsAlloted, bean.approveDate);
}
Once this method goes out of scope, there is no longer a live reference to the object bean referred to and will be collected by the garbage collector at some point in the future.
That said, unless you're sure that instances of the AddsBean class are having a noticeable negative effect on the performance of your app, you should not worry about it. The performance of your application is probably affected far more by other operations. Returning a reference type (a type defined with class instead of struct) only passes a reference to the object, not the data of the object itself.
Short Version
The MSDN documentation for Type.GetProperties states that the collection it returns is not guaranteed to be in alphabetical or declaration order, though running a simple test shows that in general it is returned in declaration order. Are there specific scenarios that you know of where this is not the case? Beyond that, what is the suggested alternative?
Detailed Version
I realize the MSDN documentation for Type.GetProperties states:
The GetProperties method does not return properties in a particular
order, such as alphabetical or declaration order. Your code must not
depend on the order in which properties are returned, because that
order varies.
so there is no guarantee that the collection returned by the method will be ordered any specific way. Based on some tests, I've found to the contrary that the properties returned appear in the order they're defined in the type.
Example:
class Simple
{
public int FieldB { get; set; }
public string FieldA { get; set; }
public byte FieldC { get; set; }
}
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Console.WriteLine("Simple Properties:");
foreach (var propInfo in typeof(Simple).GetProperties())
Console.WriteLine("\t{0}", propInfo.Name);
}
}
Output:
Simple Properties:
FieldB
FieldA
FieldC
One such case that this differs only slightly is when the type in question has a parent who also has properties:
class Parent
{
public int ParentFieldB { get; set; }
public string ParentFieldA { get; set; }
public byte ParentFieldC { get; set; }
}
class Child : Parent
{
public int ChildFieldB { get; set; }
public string ChildFieldA { get; set; }
public byte ChildFieldC { get; set; }
}
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Console.WriteLine("Parent Properties:");
foreach (var propInfo in typeof(Parent).GetProperties())
Console.WriteLine("\t{0}", propInfo.Name);
Console.WriteLine("Child Properties:");
foreach (var propInfo in typeof(Child).GetProperties())
Console.WriteLine("\t{0}", propInfo.Name);
}
}
Output:
Parent Properties:
ParentFieldB
ParentFieldA
ParentFieldC
Child Properties:
ChildFieldB
ChildFieldA
ChildFieldC
ParentFieldB
ParentFieldA
ParentFieldC
Which means the GetProperties method walks up the inheritance chain from bottom up when discovering the properties. That's fine and can be handled as such.
Questions:
Are there specific situations where the described behavior would differ that I've missed?
If depending on the order is not recommended then what is the recommended approach?
One seemingly obvious solution would be to define a custom attribute which indicates the order in which the properties should appear (Similar to the Order property on the DataMember attribute). Something like:
public class PropOrderAttribute : Attribute
{
public int SeqNbr { get; set; }
}
And then implement such as:
class Simple
{
[PropOrder(SeqNbr = 0)]
public int FieldB { get; set; }
[PropOrder(SeqNbr = 1)]
public string FieldA { get; set; }
[PropOrder(SeqNbr = 2)]
public byte FieldC { get; set; }
}
But as many have found, this becomes a serious maintenance problem if your type has 100 properties and you need to add one between the first 2.
UPDATE
The examples shown here are simply for demonstrative purposes. In my specific scenario, I define a message format using a class, then iterate through the properties of the class and grab their attributes to see how a specific field in the message should be demarshaled. The order of the fields in the message is significant so the order of the properties in my class needs to be significant.
It works currently by just iterating over the return collection from GetProperties, but since the documentation states it is not recommended I was looking to understand why and what other option do I have?
The order simply isn't guaranteed; whatever happens.... Happens.
Obvious cases where it could change:
anything that implements ICustomTypeDescriptor
anything with a TypeDescriptionProvider
But a more subtle case: partial classes. If a class is split over multiple files, the order of their usage is not defined at all. See Is the "textual order" across partial classes formally defined?
Of course, it isn't defined even for a single (non-partial) definition ;p
But imagine
File 1
partial class Foo {
public int A {get;set;}
}
File 2
partial class Foo {
public int B {get;set:}
}
There is no formal declaration order here between A and B. See the linked post to see how it tends to happen, though.
Re your edit; the best approach there is to specify the marshal info separately; a common approach would be to use a custom attribute that takes a numeric order, and decorate the members with that. You can then order based on this number. protobuf-net does something very similar, and frankly I'd suggest using an existing serialization library here:
[ProtoMember(n)]
public int Foo {get;set;}
Where "n" is an integer. In the case of protobuf-net specifically, there is also an API to specify these numbers separately, which is useful when the type is not under your direct control.
For what it's worth, sorting by MetadataToken seemed to work for me.
GetType().GetProperties().OrderBy(x => x.MetadataToken)
Original Article (broken link, just listed here for attribution):
http://www.sebastienmahe.com/v3/seb.blog/2010/03/08/c-reflection-getproperties-kept-in-declaration-order/
I use custom attributes to add the necessary metadata myself (it's used with a REST like service which consumes and returns CRLF delimited Key=Value pairs.
First, a custom attribute:
class ParameterOrderAttribute : Attribute
{
public int Order { get; private set; }
public ParameterOrderAttribute(int order)
{
Order = order;
}
}
Then, decorate your classes:
class Response : Message
{
[ParameterOrder(0)]
public int Code { get; set; }
}
class RegionsResponse : Response
{
[ParameterOrder(1)]
public string Regions { get; set; }
}
class HousesResponse : Response
{
public string Houses { get; set; }
}
A handy method for converting a PropertyInfo into a sortable int:
private int PropertyOrder(PropertyInfo propInfo)
{
int output;
var orderAttr = (ParameterOrderAttribute)propInfo.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(ParameterOrderAttribute), true).SingleOrDefault();
output = orderAttr != null ? orderAttr.Order : Int32.MaxValue;
return output;
}
Even better, write is as an extension:
static class PropertyInfoExtensions
{
private static int PropertyOrder(this PropertyInfo propInfo)
{
int output;
var orderAttr = (ParameterOrderAttribute)propInfo.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(ParameterOrderAttribute), true).SingleOrDefault();
output = orderAttr != null ? orderAttr.Order : Int32.MaxValue;
return output;
}
}
Finally you can now query your Type object with:
var props = from p in type.GetProperties()
where p.CanWrite
orderby p.PropertyOrder() ascending
select p;
Relying on an implementation detail that is explicitly documented as being not guaranteed is a recipe for disaster.
The 'recommended approach' would vary depending on what you want to do with these properties once you have them. Just displaying them on the screen? MSDN docs group by member type (property, field, function) and then alphabetize within the groups.
If your message format relies on the order of the fields, then you'd need to either:
Specify the expected order in some sort of message definition. Google protocol buffers works this way if I recall- the message definition is compiled in that case from a .proto file into a code file for use in whatever language you happen to be working with.
Rely on an order that can be independently generated, e.g. alphabetical order.
1:
I've spent the last day troubleshooting a problem in an MVC 3 project, and it all came down to this particular problem. It basically relied on the property order being the same throughout the session, but on some occations a few of the properties switched places, messing up the site.
First the code called Type.GetProperties() to define column names in a dynamic jqGrid table, something that in this case occurs once per page_load. Subsequent times the Type.GetProperties() method was called was to populate the actual data for the table, and in some rare instances the properties switched places and messed up the presentation completely. In some instances other properties that the site relied upon for a hierarchical subgrid got switched, i.e. you could no longer see the sub data because the ID column contained erroneous data. In other words: yes, this can definitely happen. Beware.
2:
If you need consistent order throughout the system session but not nessecarily exactly the same order for all sessions the workaround is dead simple: store the PropertyInfo[] array you get from Type.GetProperties() as a value in the webcache or in a dictionary with the type (or typename) as the cache/dictionary key. Subsequently, whenever you're about to do a Type.GetProperties(), instead substitute it for HttpRuntime.Cache.Get(Type/Typename) or Dictionary.TryGetValue(Type/Typename, out PropertyInfo[]). In this way you'll be guaranteed to always get the order you encountered the first time.
If you always need the same order (i.e. for all system sessions) I suggest you combine the above approach with some type of configuration mechanism, i.e. specify the order in the web.config/app.config, sort the PropertyInfo[] array you get from Type.GetProperties() according to the specified order, and then store it in cache/static dictionary.