How to define EDI data structure C090 - c#

I am attempting to create an API that will allow me to create and parse EDI messages in C#.
As a proof of concept and to keep it simple I am attempting to write a small class library to create a C090 data structure, which you can seehere
I am not sure how it's even possible to create properties for the 3286 data element as there are five of them. I don't really want to use arrays or lists for this and was wondering if there was any possible way of creating these as five properties, but without bastardizing them with underscores or numbers?

I have managed to find a way of creating the data structure by defining all of the elements of the composite using class attributes.
When calling the Append(Element) method it will check the definition to see if Element is part of the composite and throws an exception if it isn't, otherwise it will be added to the list, for example:
C090 c = doc.CreateComposite<C090>();
E3477 e = doc.CreateElement<E3477>();
e.Value = CodesList.E3477.Code001;
c.Append( e );
Seems to work great so far!

Related

C# custom file parsing with 2 delimiters and different record types

I have a (not quite valid) CSV file that contains rows of multiple types. Any record could be one of about 6 different types and each type has a different number of properties. The first part of any row contains the timestamp and the type of record, followed by a standard CSV of the data.
Example
1456057920 PERSON, Ted Danson, 123 Fake Street, 555-123-3214, blah
1476195120 PLACE, Detroit, Michigan, 12345
1440581532 THING, Bucket, Has holes, Not a good bucket
And to make matters more complex, I need to be able to do different things with the records depending on certain criteria. So a PERSON type can be automatically inserted into a DB without user input, but a THING type would be displayed on screen for the user to review and approve before adding to DB and continuing the parse, etc.
Normally, I would use a library like CsvHelper to map the records to a type, but in this case since the types could be different, and the first part uses a space instead of comma, I dont know how to do that with a standard CSV library. So currently how I am doing it each loop is:
String split based off comma.
Split the first array item by the space.
Use a switch statement to determine the type and create the object.
Put that object into a List of type object.
Get confused as to where to go now because i now have a list of various types and will have to use yet another switch or if to determine the next parts.
I don't really know for sure if I will actually need that List but I have a feeling the user will want the ability to manually flip through records in the file.
By this point, this is starting to make for very long, confusing code, and my gut feeling tells me there has to be a cleaner way to do this. I thought maybe using Type.GetType(string) would help simplify the code some, but this seems like it might be terribly inefficient in a loop with 10k+ records and might make things even more confusing. I then thought maybe making some interfaces might help, but I'm not the greatest at using interfaces in this context and I seem to end up in about this same situation.
So what would be a more manageable way to parse this file? Are there any C# parsing libraries out there that would be able to handle something like this?
You can implement an IRecord interface that has a Timestamp property and a Process method (perhaps others as well).
Then, implement concrete types for each type of record.
Use a switch statement to determine the type and create and populate the correct concrete type.
Place each object in a List
After that you can do whatever you need. Some examples:
Loop through each item and call Process() to handle it.
Use linq .OfType<{concrete type}> to segment the list. (Warning with 10k
records, this would be slow since it would traverse the entire list for each concrete type.)
Use an overridden ToString method to give a single text representation of the IRecord
If using WPF, you can define a datatype template for each concrete type, bind an ItemsControl derivative to a collection of IRecords and your "detail" display (e.g. ListItem or separate ContentControl) will automagically display the item using the correct DataTemplate
Continuing in my comment - well that depends. What u described is actually pretty good for starters, u can of course expand it to a series of factories one for each object type - so that you move from explicit switch into searching for first factory that can parse a line. Might prove useful if u are looking to adding more object types in the future - you just add then another factory for new kind of object. Up to you if these objects should share a common interface. Interface is used generally to define a a behavior, so it doesn't seem so. Maybe you should rather just a Dictionary? You need to ask urself if you actually need strongly typed objects here? Maybe what you need is a simple class with ObjectType property and Dictionary of properties with some helper methods for easy typed properties access like GetBool, GetInt or generic Get?

How to create the ability to apply a generic data source class

This is maybe something I know how to do or have already done it in the past. For some reason I am drawing a blank on how to wrap my head around it. This is more for learning as well as trying to implement something in my app.
I am using a set of third party controls. These controls offer a lot of functionality which is great. However, I want to be able to create a custom object that handle the logic/properties for the datasource of this control.
For example, there is a spreadsheet like object that I am using. You supply the spreadsheet like object some data and it pulls in your data. The problem here is that you need to set the columns, their data types, and other formatting/events as well as some logic to spit the data back to the user.
List<CustomClassWithProperties> dataSource
The custom class has some properties that will be translated to the columns. Like ProductName, Price, SalesDepartment, DatePurchased etc. This can be done by supplying the spreadsheet the columns and their data types each time. I want to be able to create a helper class that you just supply a list, a visible column list, and an editable column list and the data will fill in without any other issues.
Using the above list, I would imagine something similar to this:
DataHelperClass dtHlpr = new DataHelperClass(List<CustomClassWithProperties> data, List<string> visibleColumns, List<string> editableColumns)
This data helper class will take the data input list as the spreadsheet data source. It would then take the visibleColumns list and use that to set the visible rows, same for editableColumns.
Where I am running into a mental block (long week) is when I want to be able to reuse this. Let's say I have a List that has completely different properties. I would want my constructor for the data helper to be able to handle any List I send to it. Looking at whatever code I can get to for the third party controls, it appears that their data source is of type object.
Could someone point me in the right direction? I am thinking it has to do with generics and some interface implementation. I just honestly cannot think of where to start.
You can make the class itself generic:
public class DataHelperClass<T>
{
public DataHelperClass(List<T> data, ...) { ... }
}
DataHelperClass<CustomClassWithProperties> dtHlpr = new DataHelperClass<CustomClassWithProperties>(List<CustomClassWithProperties> data, List<string> visibleColumns, List<string> editableColumns)
You'd then perform your reflection against typeof(T).
I'd also be tempted to use IEnumerable<T> rather than List<T> if possible, but that's a matter of preference, more or less.
This is similar to using a simple List<object>, except that it enforces that all objects in the list inherit from the same type (which might well be object), so you get some more type-checking than you otherwise would.
You mentioned interfaces, I don't see any reason here to include that (from what you've told us, at least), but you can certainly make a generic interface via the same syntax.

Is it OK to use dictionaries when I don't need to quickly access their values?

Normally, I use a dictionary like a list, but with a key of a different type. I like the ability to quickly access individual items in the dictionary without having to loop through it until I find the item with the right property (because the property I'm looking for is in the Key).
But there is another possible use of a dictionary. I could just use the Key to store property A and the Value to store property B without ever using the dictionary's special functionality. For example, I could store a list of persons just by storing the forename in the key and the family name in the value (let's assume, for the sake of simplicity, that there won't ever be two people with the same forename, because I just couldn't come up with an better example). I would only use that dictionary to loop through it in a foreach loop and add items to it (no removing, sorting or accessing individual items). There would actually be no difference to using a List<KeyValuePair<string, string>> from using a Dictionary<string, string> (at least not in the example that I gave - I know that I could e. g. store multiple items wiht the same key in the list).
So, to sum it up, what should I do when I don't need to use the special functionalities a dictionary provides and just use it to store something that has exactly two properties:
use a Dictionary<,>
use a List<KeyValuePair<,>
use a List<MyType> with MyType being a custom class that contains the two properties and a constructor.
Don't use dictionaries for that.
If you don't want to create a class for this purpose, use something like List<Tuple<T1,T2>>. But keep in mind a custom class will be both more readable and more flexible.
Here's the reason: it will be much more easy to read your code if you use proper data structures. Using a dictionary will only confuse the reader, and you'll have problems the day a duplicate key shows up.
If someone reads your code and sees a Dictionary being used, he will assume you really mean to use a map-like structure. Your code should be clear and your intent should be obvious when reading it.
If you're concerned with performance you should probably store the data in a List. A Dictionary has lots of internal overhead. Both memory as well as CPU.
If you're just concerned with readability, chose the data structure that best captures your intent. If you are storing key-value pairs (for example, custom fields in a bug tracker issue) then use a Dictionary. If you are just storing items without them having some kind of logical key, use a List.
It takes little work to create a custom class to use as an item in a List. Using a Dictionary just because it gives you a Key property for each item is a misuse of that data structure. It is easy to create a custom class that also has a Key property.
Use List<MyType> where MyType includes all the values.
The problem with the dictionary approach is that it's not flexible. If you later decide to add middle names, you'll need to redesign your whole data structure, rather than just adding another field to MyType.

Find number of serialized objects

My issue is trying to determine a number of objects created, the objects being serialized from an XML document. The XML document should be set up for simplicity, so any developer can add an additional object and need no further modification to the code. However each of these objects need to be handled/updated seperately, and specifically, some of the objects are of different sub-classes, which need to be handled differently. So what would be my simplest course of action, allowing other to add objects via the XML, but still ensuring the proper logic happenes for each?
This is totally a bad idea, but if you want something constructive...
Model your XML document objects and include some kind of known syntax for you to specify Lambda expressions in it. So if you enter a
<BinaryExpresion>
<NodeType>Add</NodeType>
<Left>3</Left>
<Right>4</Right>
</BinaryExpression>
Then when you read and compile the expression, you could run that code against the data if the XML object and do something (in this case, executing 3 + 4)

DataTable vs. Collection in .Net

I am writing a program that needs to read a set of records that describe the register map of a device I need to communicate with. Each record will have a handfull of fields that describe the properties of each register.
I don't really need to edit or modify the data in my VB or C# program, though I would like to be able to display the data on a grid. I would like to store the data in a CSV file, or perhaps an XML file. I need to enable users to edit the data off-line, preferably in excel.
I am considering using a DataTable or a Collection of "Register" objects (which I would define).
I prototyped a DataTable, and found I can read/write XML easily using the built in methods and I can easily bind to a DataGridView. I was not able to find a way to retreive info on a single register without using a query that returns a collection of rows, even though I defined a unique primaty key column. The syntax to get a value from a column is also complex, though I could be missing something on both counts.
I'm tempted to use a collection of "Register" objects that I can access via a unique key. It would be a little more coding up front, but seems like a cleaner solution overall. I should still be able to use LINQ to dataset to query subsets of registers when I need them, but would also be able to grab a single field using a the key value, something like this: Registers(keyValue).fieldName).
Which would be a cleaner approach to the problem?
Is there a way to read/write XML into a Collection without needing custom code?
Could this be accomplished using String for a key?
UPDATE: Sounds like the consensus is towards the Collection of register Objects. Makes sense to me. I was leaning that way, and since nobody pointed out any DataTable features that would simplify acessing a single row, it looks like the Collection is clearly the way to go. Thanks to those who weighed in.
I would be inclined not to use data sets. It would be better to work with objects and collections. Your code will be more maintainable/readable, composable, testable & reusable.
Given that you can do queries on the data set to return particular row, you might find that a LINQ query to turn the rows into objects may be all the custom code that you need.
Using a Dictionary<string, Register> for look ups is a good idea if you have a large number of items (say greater than 1000). Otherwise a simple LINQ query should be fine.
It depends on how you define 'clean'.
A generic collection is potentially MUCH more lightweight than a DataTable. But on the other hand that doesn't seem to be too much of an issue for you. And unless you go into heavy reflection you'll have to write some code to read/write xml.
If you use a key I'd also recommend (in the case of the collection) to use a Dictionary. That way you have a Collection of the raw data and still can identify each entry through the key in the Dictionary.
I usually use datatables if its something quick and unlikely to be used in any other way. If it's something I can see evolving into an object that has its own use within the app (like your Register Object you mentioned).
It might be a little extra code up front - but it saves converting from a datatable to the collection in the future if you come up with something you would like to do based on an individual row, or if you want/need to add some sort of extra functionality to that element down the road.
I would go with the collection of objects so you can swap out the data access later if you need to.
You can serialize classes with an xml serializer and defining a Serialize attribute or something like that (it has been a while since I done that, sorry for the vagueness). A DataSet or DataTable works great with XML.
Both DS and DT have ReadXml and WriteXml methods. XML must be predefined format, but it works seamlessly.
Otherwise, I personally like collections or dictionaries; DS/DT are OK, but I like custom objects, and LINQ adds in some power.
HTH.

Categories

Resources