So I just created a method that inherits with Facebook and retrieves some information from a user.
What I want now is to send that information to another method so I can put that information to my database.
I'm going to show you the last "stick" in my first method (where I retrieve facebook info) and show you the first "stick" of the second method. Please if you have any ideas on how to do this, reply!
So this is when I add all facebook info from my AuthorizeFacebook method.
GetFacebook.Add(new FacebookInformation
{
Birthday = fbBirthday,
FbEmail = fbEmail,
FbId = fbId,
FbImage = fbPicture,
FbLastName = fbLastName,
Location = fbLocation,
FbName = fbName,
});
model.FacebookInformation = GetFacebook;
and after this I got a new method only:
public void CreateUser()
{
// get the "GetFacebook" class in here?
}
your question is very unclear. Are you looking for something like this:
public void CreateUser(IEnumerable<FacebookInformation> facebookInfo)
{
// write everything from facebookInfo into database
}
You can do something like this:
return RedirectToAction("CreateUser", "SomeController", model);
where model is this model.FacebookInformation = GetFacebook; where you put the information. You can even use your current model's property to pass on:
model.FacebookInformation = GetFacebook;
return RedirectToAction("CreateUser", "SomeController", model.FacebookInformation);
and use
public void CreateUser(List<FacebookInformation> info)
{
// get the "GetFacebook" class in here?
}
if you don't need the whole model you can create smaller model only for that property "FacebookInformation" and pass only this model like this:
publuc class FacebookInformationModel
{
public sometype Birthday { get; set; }
public sometype FbEmail { get; set; }
public sometype FbId { get; set; }
public sometype FbImage { get; set; }
public sometype FbLastName { get; set; }
public sometype Location { get; set; }
public sometype FbName { get; set; }
}
or if GetFacebook returns collection
public class FacebookInformationModel
{
public List<FacebookInformation> info { get; set; }
}
and then pass it at the end of the 1st method like this again :
FacebookInformationModel info = GetFacebook;
return RedirectToAction("CreateUser", "SomeController", info);
the get method looks like this:
public void CreateUser(FacebookInformationModel model)
{
// get the "GetFacebook" class in here?
}
I'm just guessing here as you have not provided what GetFacebook is as structure( I guess some sort of collection as you use .Add) and also what model.FacebookInformation property holds as values , but i assume it is something like List.
Related
Let's say I have the following:
public class Order
{
public string orderNumber { get; set; }
public string customerName { get; set; }
public bool isRewardsMember { get; set; }
public string transactionNumber { get; set; }
public List<Guid> cart { get; set; }
public CouponResponse GeneratedCoupons = GenerateCoupons(this); <--- How could I do this?
public CouponResponse GenerateCoupons(Order order)
{
string congrats = "Based on this transaction we believe you would like these coupons.";
CouponResponse.orderGuid = order.orderGuid;
CouponResponse.orderNumber = order.orderNumber;
// blah blah blah
}
}
And I wanted to automatically create some kind of string response based on the object on generation. Could I do something like the above and just do something like this.order, or should I just use a constructor and bypass this? I want to try to have this function to be callable in case couponresponse is for whatever reason not created, or simply use this for further data collection later.
Passing an object for 2 properties seems like unnecessary coupling, but you could use the following syntax to make GeneratedCoupons do what you want:
public CouponResponse GeneratedCoupons => GenerateCoupons(this);
I have 2 base classes which 1 for search criteria and other 1 for search results.
I also have 2 derived classes for User object versions of both of those.
When I put a breakpoint in the controller action I can see all properties are populated as I've hardcoded.
When I call this action directly in the browser, each of my derived object properties is null.
I'm guessing the JSON serialization is not able to tell the difference from the base class to the derived one.
Is there a way to solve this?
public class BaseSearchCriteria
{
public int Page { get; set; }
public int RecordsPerPage { get; set; }
}
public class BaseSearchResults
{
public int TotalResults { get; set; }
public virtual BaseSearchCriteria SearchCriteria { get; set; }
}
public class UserSearchCriteria : BaseSearchCriteria
{
public string Username { get; set; }
}
public class UserSearchResults : BaseSearchResults
{
public new UserSearchCriteria SearchCriteria { get; set; }
}
public JsonResult Search(UserSearchCriteria model)
{
var viewModel = new UserSearchResults
{
SearchCriteria = new UserSearchCriteria
{
Page = 1,
RecordsPerPage = 15
}
};
viewModel.TotalResults = 100;
return Json(viewModel, JsonRequestBehavior.AllowGet);
}
Maybe good way to deal with it is to use generics as Daniel A. White propose.
Sample gist here.
I have an object containing different properties like the object below:
public class CompressedLogResponse
{
public string LoggerType { get; set; }
public int NumberOfRegisters { get; set; }
public int NewLogId { get; set; }
public DateTime LoggerAnnounceTime { get; set; }
public List<Log> Log{ get; set; }
}
How can I return a List of this objekt that does not include the List<Log> Log property?
Linq would be preffered
Thanks for any help that you can provide
You cannot just hide a property of a class (you declared it a as public)
Option 1:
Althought as Robson wrote you can set it null (thats not very reliable thaught cause nobody expects a class containing a property that is always null)
Option2:
If you consume the class on the same place use a anonymous type as Mez wrote, althought it sounds like you want to hide the Property from external usage. (I don't like the dynamic approach, the dynamic keyword was made for interop/DOM not for transporting anonymous types.)
Option3:
If you want a List of this type to be returned without the Log property, you have to create a new class (Inheritance is a good way to realize this):
public class CompressedLogResponseBase
{
public string LoggerType { get; set; }
public int NumberOfRegisters { get; set; }
public int NewLogId { get; set; }
public DateTime LoggerAnnounceTime { get; set; }
}
public class CompressedLogResponse : CompressedLogResponseBase
{
public List<Log> Log{ get; set; }
}
Now you can return a list of base items (that do not have a Log property at all)
public List<CompressedLogResponseBase> ReturnWithoutLog(IEnumerable<CompressedLogResponse> items)
{
return ((IEnumerable<CompressedLogResponseBase>)items).ToList();
}
If a IEnumerable as return type is suficient it becomes really easy
public IEnumerable<CompressedLogResponseBase> ReturnWithoutLog(IEnumerable<CompressedLogResponse> items)
{
return items
}
whith "does not include the List Log property" i guess you mean that the property "public List Log" will be blanked but still there, so you can just null that property out, because if you create an object that doesn't contain the "public List Log" property, than it will not be a "CompressedLogResponse" but will be another type.
List<CompressedLogResponse> listOne = new List<CompressedLogResponse>();
//....
//fill the listOne
//....
List<CompressedLogResponse> listWithoutListLog = (from item in listOne
select new CompressedLogResponse(
LoggerType = item.LoggerType,
NumberOfRegisters = item.NumberOfRegisters ,
NewLogId = item.NewLogId ,
LoggerAnnounceTime = item.LoggerAnnounceTime ,
Log= null)).ToList();
You can return an anonymous list of your original list like the following;
public static List<dynamic> Test() {
List<CompressedLogResponse> list = new List<CompressedLogResponse>();
var result = list.Select(x => new
{
x.LoggerAnnounceTime,
x.LoggerType,
x.NewLogId,
x.NumberOfRegisters
});
return result.ToList<dynamic>();
}
Take a look at the .Select(), and also the dynamic keyword.
Then to call it,
var x = Test();
foreach(dynamic o in x)
{
int NumberOfRegisters;
//You have 2 ways... either by
NumberOfRegisters = o.NumberOfRegisters;
// or reflection
NumberOfRegisters = o.GetType().GetProperty("NumberOfRegisters").GetValue(o, null);
}
Let's say I have a class from a 3rd-party, which is a data-model. It has perhaps 100 properties (some with public setters and getters, others with public getters but private setters). Let's call this class ContosoEmployeeModel
I want to facade this class with an interface (INavigationItem, which has Name and DBID properties) to allow it to be used in my application (it's a PowerShell provider, but that's not important right now). However, it also needs to be usable as a ContosoEmployeeModel.
My initial implementation looked like this:
public class ContosoEmployeeModel
{
// Note this class is not under my control. I'm supplied
// an instance of it that I have to work with.
public DateTime EmployeeDateOfBirth { get; set; }
// and 99 other properties.
}
public class FacadedEmployeeModel : ContosoEmployeeModel, INavigationItem
{
private ContosoEmployeeModel model;
public FacadedEmployeeModel(ContosoEmployeeModel model)
{
this.model = model;
}
// INavigationItem properties
string INavigationItem.Name { get; set;}
int INavigationItem.DBID { get; set;}
// ContosoEmployeeModel properties
public DateTime EmployeeDateOfBirth
{
get { return this.model.EmployeeDateOfBirth; }
set { this.model.EmployeeDateOfBirth = value; }
}
// And now write 99 more properties that look like this :-(
}
However, it's clear that this will involve writing a huge amount of boilerplate code to expose all the properties , and I'd rather avoid this if I can. I can T4 code-generate this code in a partial class, and will do if there aren't any better ideas, but I though I'd ask here to see if anyone had any better ideas using some super wizzy bit of C# magic
Please note - the API I use to obtain the ContosoEmployeeModel can only return a ContosoEmployeeModel - I can't extend it to return a FacededEmployeeModel, so wrapping the model is the only solution I can think of - I'm happy to be corrected though :)
The other approach may be suitable for you is to use AutoMapper to map base class to your facade here is sample code:
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var model = new Model { Count = 123, Date = DateTime.Now, Name = "Some name" };
Mapper.CreateMap<Model, FacadeForModel>();
var mappedObject = AutoMapper.Mapper.Map<FacadeForModel>(model);
Console.WriteLine(mappedObject);
Console.ReadLine();
}
class Model
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public DateTime Date { get; set; }
public int Count { get; set; }
}
interface INavigationItem
{
int Id { get; set; }
string OtherProp { get; set; }
}
class FacadeForModel : Model, INavigationItem
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string OtherProp { get; set; }
}
}
Resharper allows the creation of "delegating members", which copies the interface of a contained object onto the containing object and tunnels the method calls/property access through to the contained object.
http://www.jetbrains.com/resharper/webhelp/Code_Generation__Delegating_Members.html
Once you've done that, you can then extract an interface on your proxy class.
I am coverting my app from webforms to mvc, at the moment i am at a design issue (well i just dont know how to do it in mvc).
Basically my model would be something like this:
public class DamagedItem
{
public Int32 LoanId {get;set;}
public String IdentityCode {get;set;}
public virtual ICollection<DamagedItems> DamagedItems {get;set;}
}
In my controller i would like to do:
public ActionResult Add(DamagedItem damagedItem)
{
//Do update logic here
}
Then in my view i can add to the ICollection as needed.
But, i can't do this because if i try and access the ICollection from my controller it is null.
Here is an image of when i want to do:
I just dont know how to lay it out in my view, how to i add such items to my ICollection, update the view then when i need to save i have access to what i have added from my controller?
Thanks,
Nick
Edit:
I was thinking of using a partial in the view and doing all the logic for the bottom half using ajax and storing it in a session variable, but i would prefer NOT to make it reliant on ajax.
It is better to separate: you shoud have 2 actions, which produce 2 view.
You should have LoadInformationModel classe:
public class LoadInformationModel
{
public string StudentCode { get; set; }
public string FirstName { get; set; }
// etc..
public ICollection<Damage> Type { get; set; }
}
corresponding action
[HttpGet]
public ActionResult LoanInformation(int id)
{
var loanInfo = // get data by given id..
var model = new LoadInformationModel {
StudentCode = loanInfo.StudentCode,
// etc
Type = new List<Damage> { new Damage { Value = "Damaged"}, new Damage { Value = "Damaged Again" }
}
return View(model);
}
As well as RepairDataModel class
public class RepairDataModel
{
public bool CoveredByWarranty { get; set; }
public ICollection Status { get; set; }
}
And corresponding action
[HttpGet]
public ActionResult Repair(int id)
{
// logic
return View(model);
}
Your task is to create Post handler, that would save data to DB then form submitted
[HttpPost]
public ActionResult(RepairDataModel model)
{
// save to db
return View();
}
The view returned by Index() method, could be created like
#Html.RenderAction("LoanInformation")
#Html.RenderAction("Repair")
The rest depends on your desing and imagination. I hope that would give you direction.
What I can see is only the DamagedItem lacks a contructor with values for Collection;
public class DamagedItem
{
public DamagedItem()
{
DamagedItems = new List<DamagedItems>();
DamagedItems.Add(new DamagedItem { Description = "Damaged" } );
}
public Int32 LoanId {get;set;}
public String IdentityCode {get;set;}
public virtual ICollection<DamagedItems> DamagedItems {get;set;}
}