I’m exploring the use of custom TypeDescriptors to intercept when a data-bound property on a WPF control sets a CLR property. Due to reasons I need to figure out which exact control is setting a value.
If I use INotifyPropertyChanged I’ll get all of the different controls that subscribe to any property in my view model, not all that helpful. So I figured I’d go down the custom TypeDescriptor path and try the ProperyDescriptor.AddValueChanged and PropertyDescriptor.OnValueChanged way.
I can see that WPF calls ProperyDescriptor.AddValueChanged as expected, but my call to ProperyDescriptor.OnValueChanged never seems to trigger a call to PropertyDescriptor.GetValue and an update in the UI.
Are there some gotchas to using this stuff that I’m missing? Or are there other ways to figure out who’s subscribing to a CLR property. My alternative as I see it now would be to emit a custom proxy for the whole shebang, but I’d very much like to not have do that.
Edit: On looking at bit closer, I noticed that the delegates I get through PropertyDescriptor.AddValueChanged go to some internal MS helper class, so without some unreliable reflection-fu there's no way to use that to get the source control. I think I'll have to go with a custom proxy with dependency properties.
There's an alternative that may be useful. In a binding, you can set the NotifyOnSourceUpdated to True, which will raise the control's SourceUpdated event when WPF updates the CLR property it's data-bound to. For example, in a TextBox you can write:
<TextBox
Text="{Binding MyText, NotifyOnSourceUpdated=True}"
SourceUpdated="TextBox_OnSourceUpdated"
/>
In the code-behind, you can get the exact control (the sender) and the name of the dependency property that updated the CLR property:
private void TextBox_OnSourceUpdated(object sender, DataTransferEventArgs e)
{
var control = (TextBox)sender;
var propertyName = e.Property.Name;
}
With this method, you need to know that the control was a TextBox, but you can probably update it to test different kinds of controls. It depends on what you need this for, really.
I having trouble to understand some of the features in the RoutedCommand.
The RoutedCommand can be created and some input gesture can be attached:
HomeZoomPanCommand = new RoutedCommand();
HomeZoomPanCommand.InputGestures.Add(new KeyGesture(Key.F10, ModifierKeys.None));
Now I have to add the command to the CommandBindings collection which is quite clear to me.
Normally I would assume, that if I want to have F10 working on this command, I have to add a KeyBinding also to the InputBindings. This seems also clear to me.
But what happens in detail when I have the InputGestures already assigned to the RoutedCommand? I assumed that the gesture is automatically added to the InputBindings collection but it is obviously not.
For what reason are there two different ways. Does the InputGesture on the command really work or is it only to show it in the menu with any function?
I'm trying to fire a TriggerAction in response to a RoutedCommand passing through a control which doesn't otherwise handle it. The problem is that as far as I can tell there is no such thing as "CommandTrigger".
This is the closest I've come to the functionality I want:
<MyControl.Triggers>
<EventTrigger xmlns:in="clr-namespace:System.Windows.Input;assembly=PresentationCore"
RoutedEvent="in:CommandManager.PreviewExecuted">
<SoundPlayerAction Source="foo"/>
</EventTrigger>
</ui:Sidebar.Triggers>
The sound is played whenever a command passes though MyControl, but it's not possible to specify which command to fire in response to. So close...
This wouldn't be such a problem if it weren't for the non-extensibility of the Trigger/Action system. According to someone on MSDN the necessary methods and constructors are internal.
Things I have tried:
I am aware of the extensible Blend class System.Windows.Interactivity.TriggerBase<T>, and in fact I've already created my own custom class based on it which does exactly what I want. Unfortunately none of that is an option as my target environment doesn't implement it.
I am also aware that it would be trivial to add a CommandBinding to the control and avoid setting e.Handled = true, but the whole point of this exercise is to avoid code-behind.
I'm trying to bind Left ALT key with a command to toggle visibility of a menu in WPF.
But it doesn't work.. Command is not firing..
<Window.InputBindings>
<KeyBinding
Key="LeftAlt"
Command="{Binding Path=MenuVisibilitySetCommand}"/>
</Window.InputBindings>
I've noticed that other special Keys ( such as Alt, Ctrl etc..) also not working here..
How to do KeyBinding for Special Key in WPF ?
For LeftALt to work like this, you also need to set Modifiers property to Alt.
<KeyBinding Key="LeftAlt" Modifiers="Alt" Command="{Binding Path=MenuVisibilitySetCommand}"/>
These special Keys are called Modifier keys and this should make it clear why it is not working. A modifier Key is to "modify" the behavior of a given key, Like Shift + L makes an uppercase "L" where only the L key makes a lowercase "l". Using Modifierkeys for actual logic can be problematic and irritating, because the user is not accustomed to see real actions happening when pressing these kind of buttons. But i agree there are places where this makes sense e.g. highlighting MenuItems when hitting ALT key.
But to your actual problem: You could use codebehind and the OnKeyDown/OnKeyUp or the Preview events to implement this behavior.
protected override void OnKeyDown(KeyEventArgs e)
{
if(e.SystemKey == Key.LeftAlt)
{
myMenu.Visibility = Visibility.Visible;
// e.Handled = true; You need to evaluate if you really want to mark this key as handled!
}
base.OnKeyDown(e);
}
Of course cou could also fire your command in this code.
Suppose I have a modal dialog with a textbox and OK/Cancel buttons. And it is built on MVVM - i.e. it has a ViewModel object with a string property that the textbox is bound to.
Say, I enter some text in the textbox and then grab my mouse and click "OK". Everything works fine: at the moment of click, the textbox loses focus, which causes the binding engine to update the ViewModel's property. I get my data, everybody's happy.
Now suppose I don't use my mouse. Instead, I just hit Enter on the keyboard. This also causes the "OK" button to "click", since it is marked as IsDefault="True". But guess what? The textbox doesn not lose focus in this case, and therefore, the binding engine remains innocently ignorant, and I don't get my data. Dang!
Another variation of the same scenario: suppose I have a data entry form right in the main window, enter some data into it, and then hit Ctrl+S for "Save". Guess what? My latest entry doesn't get saved!
This may be somewhat remedied by using UpdateSourceTrigger=PropertyChanged, but that is not always possible.
One obvious case would be the use of StringFormat with binding - the text keeps jumping back into "formatted" state as I'm trying to enter it.
And another case, which I have encountered myself, is when I have some time-consuming processing in the viewmodel's property setter, and I only want to perform it when the user is "done" entering text.
This seems like an eternal problem: I remember trying to solve it systematically from ages ago, ever since I've started working with interactive interfaces, but I've never quite succeeded. In the past, I always ended up using some sort of hacks - like, say, adding an "EnsureDataSaved" method to every "presenter" (as in "MVP") and calling it at "critical" points, or something like that...
But with all the cool technologies, as well as empty hype, of WPF, I expected they'd come up with some good solution.
At critical points, you can force the binding to push through to your view model:
var textBox = Keyboard.FocusedElement as TextBox;
BindingOperations.GetBindingExpression(textBox, TextBox.TextProperty).UpdateSource();
Edit:
OK, since you don't want hacks we have to face the ugly truth:
In order to implement a clean view, the properties exposed by your view model should be friendly to frequent binding updates.
An analogy we can use is a text editor. If the application was a giant text box bound to a file on disk, every keystroke would result in writing the whole file. Even the concept of saving is not needed. That's perversely correct but terribly inefficient. We all immediately see that the view model needs to expose a buffer for the view to bind to and this re-introduces the concept of save and forces state handling in our view model.
Yet, we see this is still not efficient enough. For even medium-sized files the overhead of updating the whole-file buffer on every keystroke becomes unbearable. Next we expose commands in our view model to efficiently manipulate the buffer, never actually exchanging the whole buffer with the view.
So we conclude that in order to achieve efficiency and responsiveness with pure MVVM, we need to expose an efficient view model. That means that all text boxes can be bound through to properties with no ill effects. But, it also means that you have to push state down into the view model to handle that. And that's OK because a view model is not the model; it's job is it to handle the needs of the view.
It's true that we can rapidly prototype user interfaces by taking advantage of shortcuts like binding on focus changes. But binding on focus changes can have negative consequences in real applications and if so then we should simply not use it.
What is the alternative? Expose a property friendly to frequent updates. Call it the same thing as the old inefficient property was called. Implement your fast property using the slow property with logic that depends on the state of the view model. The view model gets the save command. It knows whether the fast property has been pushed through to the slow property. It can decide if when and where the slow property will be synched to the model.
But you say, haven't we just moved the hack from the view to the view model? No, we have lost some elegance and simplicity, but go back to the text editor analogy. We have to solve the problem, and it is the view model's job to solve it.
If we want to use pure MVVM and we want efficiency and responsiveness, then lame heuristics like let's avoid updating the binding source until the element loses focus won't help. They introduce as many problems as they solve. In that case, we should let the view model do its job, even if means adding complexity.
Assuming we accept it, how can we manage the complexity? We can implement a generic wrapper utility class to buffer the slow property and allow the view model to hook its get and set methods. Our utility class can auto-register for save command events to reduce the amount of boilerplate code in our view model.
If we do it right, then all the parts of the view model that were fast enough to be used with property changed binding will all still be the same, and the others that were worthy of asking the question "Is this property too slow?" will have a small amount of code to address the issue, and the view is none the wiser.
This is a tricky one and I agree a non-hack and more-or-less code free solution should be found. Here are my thoughts:
The view is responsible because it sets IsDefault to true and allows for this 'problem'
The ViewModel should not be responsible in any way to fix this it might introduce dependencies from VM to V and thus breaking the pattern.
Without adding (C#) code to the View all you can do is either change bindings (e.g. to UpdateSourceTrigger=PropertyChanged) or add code to a base class of the Button. In the base class of the button you might be able to shift focus to the button before executing the command. Still hack-ish but cleaner than adding code to the VM.
So at the moment the only 'nice' solutions I see require the view developers to stick to a rule; set the binding in a specific way or use a special button.
I would add a Click event handler for the default button. The button's event handler is executed prior the command will be called, so the data bindings can be updated by changing the focus in the event handler.
private void Button_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e) {
((Control)sender).Focus();
}
However, I don't know if similar approach can be used with other shorcut keys.
Yes, I have quite some experience. WPF and Silverlight still have their pain areas. MVVM doesn't solve it all; it is not a magic bullet and the support in the frameworks is getting better but still lacks. E.g., I still find editing deep child collections a problem.
At the moment I handle these situations case by case because a lot depends on the way the individual view have to work. This is what I spend most of my time on because I generate a lot of plumbing using T4 so I have time left for these quirks.
The problem is that the TextBox's text has a default source trigger of LostFocus instead of PropertyChanged. IMHO this was a wrong default choice since it is quite unexpected and can cause all sorts of problems (such as the ones you describe).
The simplest solution would be to always explicitly use UpdateSourceTrigger=PropertyChanged (as the others suggested).
If this isn't feasible (for whatever reason), I would handle the Unloaded, Closing or Closed events and manually update the binding (as shown by Rick).
Unfortunately it seems that certain scenarios are still a bit problematic with a TextBox, so some workarounds are necessary. For example, see my question. You might want to open a Connect bug (or two) with your specific problems.
EDIT:
Pressing Ctrl+S with focus on the TextBox, I would say the behavior is correct. After all, you are executing a command. This has nothing to do with the current (keyboard) focus. The command may even depend on the focused element! You are not clicking on a button or similar, which would cause the focus to change (however, depending on the button, it may fire the same command as before).
So if you want to only update the bound Text when you lose focus from the TextBox, but at the same time you want to fire a command with the newest contents of TextBox (i.e. the changes without it having lost focus), this does not match up. So either you have to change your binding to PropertyChanged, or manually update the binding.
EDIT #2:
As for your two cases why you cannot always use PropertyChanged:
What precisely are you doing with StringFormat? In all my UI work so far I use StringFormat to reformat data I am getting from the ViewModel. However, I am not sure how using StringFormat with data which is then again edited by the user should work. I am guessing you want to format the text for display, and then "unformat" the text the user enters for further processing in your ViewModel. From your description, it seems it isn't "unformatted" correctly all the time.
Open a Connect bug where it isn't working as it should.
Write your own ValueConverter which you use in the binding.
Have a separate property with the last "valid" value and use that value in your ViewModel; only update it once you get another "valid" value from the property you use in databinding.
If you have a long-running property setter (ex. a "validate" step), I would do the long-running part in a separate method (getters and setters should normally be relatively "fast"). Then run that method in a worker thread/threadpool/BackgroundWorker (make it abortable so you can restart it with a new value once the user enters more data) or similar.
What you think about proxy command and KeyBinding to ENTER key?
EDITED:
There we have one utility command (like converter), which requires knowledge about concrete view. This command can be reused for any dialog with same bug. And you add this functionality/hack only in view where this bug exists, and VM will be clear.
VM creates to adapt business to view and must provide some specific functionality like data conversion, UI commands, additional/helper fields, notifications and hacks/workarounds. And if we have leaks between levels in MVVM we have problems with: high connectivity, code reuse, unit testing for VM, pain code.
Usage in xaml (no IsDefault on Button):
<Window.Resources>
<model:ButtonProxyCommand x:Key="proxyCommand"/>
</Window.Resources>
<Window.InputBindings>
<KeyBinding Key="Enter"
Command="{Binding Source={StaticResource proxyCommand}, Path=Instance}"
CommandParameter="{Binding ElementName=_okBtn}"/>
</Window.InputBindings>
<StackPanel>
<TextBox>
<TextBox.Text>
<Binding Path="Text"></Binding>
</TextBox.Text>
</TextBox>
<Button Name="_okBtn" Command="{Binding Command}">Ok</Button>
</StackPanel>
There used special proxy command, which receive element (CommandParameter) to move focus and execute. But this class requires ButtonBase for CommandParameter:
public class ButtonProxyCommand : ICommand
{
public bool CanExecute(object parameter)
{
var btn = parameter as ButtonBase;
if (btn == null || btn.Command == null)
return false;
return btn.Command.CanExecute(btn.CommandParameter);
}
public event EventHandler CanExecuteChanged;
public void Execute(object parameter)
{
if (parameter == null)
return;
var btn = parameter as ButtonBase;
if (btn == null || btn.Command == null)
return;
Action a = () => btn.Focus();
var op = Dispatcher.CurrentDispatcher.BeginInvoke(a);
op.Wait();
btn.Command.Execute(btn.CommandParameter);
}
private static ButtonProxyCommand _instance = null;
public static ButtonProxyCommand Instance
{
get
{
if (_instance == null)
_instance = new ButtonProxyCommand();
return _instance;
}
}
}
This is just idea, not complete solution.