I recently started learning C# to start doing a project of mine. I ran into a problem, where i have to Classes dependent on each other. I have a class called MQTT_Handler which handles everything related MQTT and a Winforms class. The problem is that I need both classes to work with each other. So to control the Form class from the MQTT_class I passed over the Form instance to the constructor of the MQTT_class and delegated some methods, which works so far.
Now I have the problem that I also want send some messages over MQTT from the Form class. There is my problem.
I start everything from Program.cs which looks like this:
static void Main()
{
ApplicationConfiguration.Initialize();
UI UIInstance = new UI();
MQTT_Handler mqtt_handler = new MQTT_Handler(UIInstance);
mqtt_handler.MQTT_Client();
Application.Run(UIInstance);
}
Now what I wanted to do is just passing the matt_handler instance over to UI. But doing that would obviously create a circular dependency. Is there any way of passing an instance to a class after it has been created?
This is my MQTT class:
class MQTT_Handler
{
private UI UIInstance;
// Constructor
public MQTT_Handler(UI formInstance)
{
UIInstance = formInstance;
DelegateMethod = new changeLabelDelegate(UIInstance.change_labelMethod);
MQTT_Client();
}
}
And UI:
public partial class UI : Form
{
public delegate void changeLabelDelegate(string text);
//Constructor
public UI()
{
InitializeComponent();
}
}
The most obvious solution (to me) is to make the UI dependent on the MQTT handler. This handler should not need any knowledge about the UI.
This can be accomplished in several ways. Two examples:
Make DelegateMethod a property of MQTT_Handler and give it a suitable value when UI is instantiated:
class MQTT_Handler
{
public Action<string> DelegateMethod {get;set;}
// Constructor
public MQTT_Handler()
{
DelegateMethod = (s) => {;};
MQTT_Client();
}
}
And UI:
public partial class UI : Form
{
private MQTT_Handler _handler;
//Constructor
public UI(MQTT_Handler handler)
{
InitializeComponent();
_handler = handler;
_handler.DelegateMethod = change_labelMethod;
}
}
The second examples uses an event in the `MQTT-Handler' to notify the UI that the label needs changing (this is something of a variation on the same theme as the first example):
class MQTT_Handler
{
private Action<string> DelegateMethod;
public event? Action<string> MqttValueChanged;
// Constructor
public MQTT_Handler()
{
DelegateMethod = (s) => MqttValueChanged?.Invoke(s);
MQTT_Client();
}
}
And UI:
public partial class UI : Form
{
private MQTT_Handler _handler;
//Constructor
public UI(MQTT_Handler handler)
{
InitializeComponent();
_handler = handler;
_handler.MqttValueChanged += change_labelMethod;
}
}
Note: this second example can obviously be optimised by removing DelegateMethod in MQTT_handler and invoking the event directly wherever you would call DelegateMethod.
Related
I want the following:
public static class A
{
//do something
UpdateListOnMainForm()
}
I already know I can do this by Events, I tried to create a Event but I don't need any parameters, I just want if class A calls the Event the ListView is updating its data.
Can someone help me creating this Event? Or maybe there is a better way?
Thank you in advance!
Edit: At least I'm trying to update a ListView when I've changed the list (other class) from which the ListView takes its data from.
You want a static class to be able to trigger your main form to update its list view via an event without specifically knowing about the main form, as I understand it. This is how I would do that:
public partial class MainWindow : Window
{
public MainWindow()
{
InitializeComponent();
SingletonA.GetInstance.MyEvent += UpdateListView;
}
private void UpdateListView(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
// Update your listview
}
}
//lazy initialization of singleton - not thread safe see http://www.dotnettricks.com/learn/designpatterns/singleton-design-pattern-dotnet for other thread safe version
public class SingletonA
{
private static SingletonA instance = null;
private SingletonA() { }
public event EventHandler<EventArgs> MyEvent;
void TellFormToUpdateListView()
{
MyEvent?.Invoke(typeof(SingletonA), EventArgs.Empty);
}
public static SingletonA GetInstance
{
get
{
if (instance == null)
instance = new SingletonA();
return instance;
}
}
}
I have created a test project as a POC for this problem.
I have a WPF app, that when we use interceptors around the view models, it's stopping the propagation of events. If I disable all interceptors, it works fine.
Here is the code:
MyInterceptor.cs
public class MyInterceptor : IInterceptor
{
public void Intercept(IInvocation invocation)
{
invocation.Proceed();
}
}
IoCTestViewModel.cs
public interface IIoCTestViewModel : INotifyPropertyChanged
{
int Number { get; }
}
public class IoCTestViewModel : IIoCTestViewModel
{
public IoCTestViewModel()
{
var timer = new Timer(200);
timer.Elapsed += (a, b) => {
if(PropertyChanged != null)
{
PropertyChanged(this, new PropertyChangedEventArgs("Number"));
}
};
timer.Start();
}
public int Number
{
get
{
return new Random().Next(1, 100);
}
}
public event PropertyChangedEventHandler PropertyChanged;
}
IoCTest.xaml.cs
public partial class IoCTest : UserControl
{
public IIoCTestViewModel ViewModel { get; set; }
public IoCTest(IIoCTestViewModel viewModel)
{
InitializeComponent();
DataContext = viewModel;
}
}
App.xaml (fragment)
Container = new WindsorContainer();
Container.Register(Component.For<MyInterceptor>().ImplementedBy<MyInterceptor>());
Container.Register(Component.For<IIoCTestViewModel>().ImplementedBy<IoCTestViewModel>().Interceptors<MyInterceptor>());
Container.Register(Component.For<IoCPage>().ImplementedBy<IoCTest>()); //IoCTest is a usercontrol
OK. So once I get an instance of IoCTest and add it to a page, I don't see any changes, even though I am sending PropertyChanged every 200ms. If I remove the interceptor, everything works fine.
So how do I fix this?
The issue here is that because you declare your service to be IIoCTestViewModel, when you add an interceptor Windsor simply creates a dynamic proxy that delegates all calls to your implementation type. However, the interception is done using composition - one object delegating to another. Hence, when you raise your property changed event with a sender of this, it is a different object to the one that WPF thinks it is watching.
You should instead register your view model like this:
Container.Register(Component.For<IIoCTestViewModel,IoCTestViewModel>().ImplementedBy<IoCTestViewModel>().Interceptors<MyInterceptor>())
By specifying multiple services, one of which is actually your implementation class, Windsor will instead generate a class proxy - i.e. the interception will be done using inheritance, with the generated proxy inheriting from IoCTestViewModel. (This is known as type forwarding in Windsor). Now when you raise your event with a sender of this it correctly refers to the same instance that WPF is watching.
See here for a more detailed explanation of type forwarding and its implications for proxies
Quite some time ago, I noticed that the Windows Forms editor of Visual Studio does not support events which contain generic type parameters. For example, an event like
public event EventHandler<ListEventArgs<int>> MyStrangeEvent { add { ... } remove { ... } }
where
public class ListEventArgs<T> : EventArgs { List<T> args; }
does not even show up in the event list in the property manager of Visual Studio. Now, this is a somewhat artificial example that could easily be modified to work in Visual Studio by rewriting the classes and their events. However, I am currently working on a project where I cannot change some classes for compatibility reasons. The only thing I can do is to change the events of my user control. The events of this control currently look like this:
public event EventHandler<Plane<GDISurface>.DrawingErrorEventArgs> DrawingError { add { _Plane.DrawingError += value; } remove { _Plane.DrawingError -= value; } }
Note that the underlying Plane class (represented by the _Plane instance which is a protected field) cannot be changed. Its DrawingError event and its EventArgs type are declared in the Plane class like this:
public class Plane<T> where T : ISurface
{
...
public event EventHandler<DrawingErrorEventArgs> DrawingError = null;
...
public class DrawingErrorEventArgs : EventArgs { ... /* Uses T */ ... }
}
Of course, the Windows Forms editor of Visual Studio does not show any of the events of my user control. I have been looking for a number of workarounds to get them shown again, but have not been able to find a workaround that actually works. Here are some things that I tried:
Created a MyPlane class which inherits from Plane and used that instead: public event EventHandler<MyPlane.DrawingErrorEventArgs> DrawingError .... For reasons unknown to me, the events still don't show up in the editor. Perhaps this is due to the parameters of the event, some of which still are generic. Find a minimal working example below.
Created a helper class which defines implicit conversion operators between EventHandler<Plane<GDISurface>.DrawingErrorEventArgs> and EventHandler<GDIPlane.DrawingErrorEventArgs> where GDIPlane is just a dummy class which inherits from Plane<GDISurface>. This does work to some extent, but duplicates event calls since the conversion creates new event handlers which are passed down to _Plane which cannot be removed/unregistered properly.
Tried to inherit from EventHandler<Plane<GDISurface>.DrawingErrorEventArgs>, which obviously does not work since EventHandler<T> is sealed.
Are there any other ways to make my events visible again in the Windows Forms editor?
Best regards
Andreas
EDIT: Minimal working example for 1:
public interface ISurface { }
public class GDISurface : ISurface { }
public class Plane<T> where T : ISurface
{
public event EventHandler<DrawingErrorEventArgs> DrawingError = null;
public class DrawingErrorEventArgs : EventArgs { T stuff; }
}
public class TestControl : UserControl
{
public class GDIPlane : Plane<GDISurface> { }
GDIPlane _Plane = null;
public event EventHandler<GDIPlane.DrawingErrorEventArgs> DrawingError { add { _Plane.DrawingError += value; } remove { _Plane.DrawingError -= value; } }
}
DrawingError does not show up in the list of events in the property manager when clicking on a TestControl instance.
EDIT2: This is the original problem (without any workarounds) where the DrawingError event does of TestControl does not show up either:
public interface ISurface { }
public class GDISurface : ISurface { }
public class Plane<T> where T : ISurface
{
public event EventHandler<DrawingErrorEventArgs> DrawingError = null;
public class DrawingErrorEventArgs : EventArgs { T stuff; }
}
public class TestControl : UserControl
{
Plane<GDISurface> _Plane = null;
public event EventHandler<Plane<GDISurface>.DrawingErrorEventArgs> DrawingError { add { _Plane.DrawingError += value; } remove { _Plane.DrawingError -= value; } }
}
This is behavior specific to Visual Studio, and the cause is rooted in the fact that EventHandler<> does not specify covariance on its 'TEventArgs' (it would impose seemingly silly restrictions) and the tools do not perform enough introspection of your code to suss out an appropriate type (even though you've left a trail of type data in constructing the control.) Thus, it seems as though VS does not support generic event properties. You may consider filing a feature request on Microsoft Connect, I wouldn't suggest filing it as a bug as they may label it "by design" and close it.
As a general rule, if you need generic type parameters on your events and you need design time support for them (which are different implementation concerns), you're looking at wrapping them in a presentation-specific facade (e.g. "extra layer of code to facilitate design-time needs".)
Personally, I would reduce the generic typing you have in play now, it seems a bit excessive and if you don't understand covariance/contravariance in generic types it might put you in a tight spot at some point, such as now.
However, to work around your problem:
Consider using a custom event args class which could transport data in a non-generic property, and also use a non-generic EventHandler event/property. Understanding the 'type' of the event is then shifted away from generic type parameters and made the responsibility of your non-generic event args instead. If the 'class' of the event args is insufficient, you can add a property to convey the event type (or data type) so that receiving code can properly interpret it (assuming, of course, that it does not already know by some other means.):
public class DataEventArgs : EventArgs
{
//public string EventTypeOrPurpose { get; set; }
public object Data { get; set; }
}
This is most often only used to ferry data through an event chain, and it is usually implemented as follows:
public class DataEventArgs<T> : EventArgs
{
public T Data { get; set; }
}
Unfortunately, this also has a covariance problem, to resolve it you would actually want something more like this:
public interface IDataArgs<out T>
{
T Data { get; }
}
public class DataEventArgs<T> : EventArgs, IDataArgs<T>
{
public DataEventArgs<T>(T data)
{
_data = data;
}
private T _data;
public T Data { get { return _data; } }
}
Even so, these generic versions still don't work around Visual Studio's limitations, this is merely more proper alternative forms of what you already have shown us.
UPDATE: As requested, here is what a "purpose built facade" might look like in the most basic sense. Note that the usercontrol functions as a facade layer in this case as the eventhandler it exposes delegates to the underlying object model. There is no direct access to underlying object model from the user control (from consumer/designer perspective.)
Please note the reference tracking for event handlers is not necessary unless you dispose of these user controls throughout the lifetime of the app (it is only done to ensure proper delegate removal based on the delegate provided, which is wrapped in a closure/delegate, as you see below.)
Also worth noting I did not test-run this code beyond verifying that the designer shows DrawingError in the property grid when dropped onto a form.
namespace SampleCase3
{
public interface ISurface { }
public class GDISurface : ISurface { }
public class Plane<T> where T : ISurface
{
public event EventHandler<DrawingErrorEventArgs> DrawingError;
public class DrawingErrorEventArgs : EventArgs { T stuff; }
}
public class TestControl : UserControl
{
private Plane<GDISurface> _Plane = new Plane<GDISurface>(); // requires initialization for my own testing
public TestControl()
{
}
// i am adding this map *only* so that the removal of an event handler can be done properly
private Dictionary<EventHandler, EventHandler<Plane<GDISurface>.DrawingErrorEventArgs>> _cleanupMap = new Dictionary<EventHandler, EventHandler<Plane<GDISurface>.DrawingErrorEventArgs>>();
public event EventHandler DrawingError
{
add
{
var nonGenericHandler = value;
var genericHandler = (EventHandler<Plane<GDISurface>.DrawingErrorEventArgs>)delegate(object sender, Plane<GDISurface>.DrawingErrorEventArgs e)
{
nonGenericHandler(sender, e);
};
_Plane.DrawingError += genericHandler;
_cleanupMap[nonGenericHandler] = genericHandler;
}
remove
{
var nonGenericHandler = value;
var genericHandler = default(EventHandler<Plane<GDISurface>.DrawingErrorEventArgs>);
if (_cleanupMap.TryGetValue(nonGenericHandler, out genericHandler))
{
_Plane.DrawingError -= genericHandler;
_cleanupMap.Remove(nonGenericHandler);
}
}
}
}
}
To complement the above, here is what a non-generic event handler would now look like:
private void testControl1_DrawingError(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
var genericDrawingErrorEventArgs = e as Plane<GDISurface>.DrawingErrorEventArgs;
if (genericDrawingErrorEventArgs != null)
{
// TODO:
}
}
Note that the consumer here has to have knowledge of the type for e to perform conversion. The use of the as operator will bypass ancestry checks under the assumption that the conversion should succeed.
Something like this is as close as you're going to get. Yes it is ugly by most of our standards, but if you absolutely 'need' design-time support on top of these components and you cannot change Plane<T> (which would be more appropriate) then this, or something close to this, is the only viable workaround.
HTH
I am working on an LOB application in C# using a WinForms tabbed MDI interface. I have various forms with DataGridViews to allow the user to select an object they are interested in, which they can then view/edit in a new form.
Each of my main business objects inherit from Entity, which is defined as below:
public abstract class Entity
{
public static event Action Saved;
internal virtual void OnSaved()
{
if (Saved != null)
{
Saved();
}
}
}
I then have the objects that populate the grid (these are actually auto-generated classes from Linq-to-SQL, although I can replicate the problem with normal classes):
class Class1 : Entity
{
//Stuff
}
class Class2 : Entity
{
//Stuff
}
I want to know when an object of a given class is modified, but i don't care which instance (hence the static action) so that i can refresh the grid and perform other activities.
The problem comes when the event is fired from a derived class instance - it fires for all other derived classes too. For example:
Class1.Saved += new Action(s1);
Class2.Saved += new Action(s2);
private void TestIt()
{
Class2 o2 = new Class2();
o2.OnSaved();
}
This would fire s1 and s2, but I only want the specific one to be fired (i.e. s2). What is the best way to do this? I have quite a few classes that need this behviour and would like to avoid having to add any code to each class if possible.
Update:
Thank you for all your responses, they have been very helpful.
I have opted for a slightly different option, which I admit seems quite hacky, but works well for my purposes. This involves passing the type with the action and letting a handler filter and call relevant operations.
Entity Class:
public abstract class Entity
{
public static event Action<Type> Saved;
internal void OnSaved()
{
private Action<Type> SavedCopy = Saved;
if (SavedCopy != null)
SavedCopy(this.GetType());
}
}
Hook up handler:
Entity.Saved += new Action<Type>(Handler);
Example Handler method (this will vary from form to form):
void Handler(Type obj)
{
if (obj==typeof(Class1))
UpdateGrid();
else if (obj==typeof(Class2))
UpdateBasicInfo();
else if (obj == typeof(Class3))
DoAnotherThing();
}
Using generics could be a work around; each generic class gets a copy of the static fields.
public abstract class Entity<T>
{
public static event Action Saved = delegate { };
internal virtual void OnSaved()
{
Saved();
}
}
class Class1 : Entity<Class1>
{
//Stuff
}
class Class2 : Entity<Class2>
{
//Stuff
}
I'm not sure doing it like this is a good idea, but you could specify the type when you subscribe and when you save the data:
public abstract class Entity
{
private static Dictionary<Type, Action> Subscribers
= new Dictionary<Type, Action>();
internal virtual void OnSaved()
{
OnSaved(GetType());
}
private OnSaved(Type type)
{
Action subscribed;
Subscribers.TryGetValue(type, out subscribed);
if (subscribed != null)
subscribed();
}
public Subscribe(Type type, Action action)
{
Action subscribed;
Subscribers.TryGetValue(type, out subscribed);
Subscribers[type] = subscribed + action;
}
public Unsubscribe(Type type, Action action)
{
Action subscribed;
Subscribers.TryGetValue(type, out subscribed);
Subscribers[type] = subscribed - action;
}
}
Keep in mind that this code is not thread-safe, so if you want to use it from different threads at the same time, you need to add locking.
You will need to have an event per type, because can't determine for which type the delegate is registered when the event is defined on the base type.
public abstract class Entity
{
internal abstract void OnSaved();
}
class Class1 : Entity
{
public static event Action Saved = () => { };
internal override void OnSaved()
{
this.Saved();
}
//Stuff
}
class Class2 : Entity
{
public static event Action Saved = () => { };
internal override void OnSaved()
{
this.Saved();
}
//Stuff
}
Why does it have to be static? Make it an instance event instead.
public event Action Saved;
You have to hook it up for each instance instead of just once per class (or, in your current case, once), but it will separate the events.
I put "volatile" because it's only vaguely so.
I have a class which has a property called StopRequested. This flag can be set by other threads at any time, and needs to indicate to my code that it should stop what it's doing and exit (this is a Windows Service based process, and when Stop is called, all processing needs to clean up and stop).
I wish to create some other classes to do the actual brunt of the processing work, however these classes also have to be aware of the "stop" flag. You can't just pass the flag because it will pass a copy, and you can't pass properties as ref types.
So how do you propagate a property that might change at any time into other classes?
The only thing I can think of is to pass a reference to the parent class, but I dislike coupling the worker classes to the parent for one flag. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
EDIT:
Here's a basic example:
public class A
{
public bool StopRequested { get; set; }
private Worker = new Worker();
public void DoWork();
{
worker.DoWork();
}
}
public class Worker
{
public void DoWork()
{
while(!StopRequested)
{
....
}
}
}
You could have each of your worker classes have their own StopRequest property and then just set that whenever StopRequest is flagged.
private List<IStopable> WorkerClasses = new List< IStopable > ()
public Bool StopRequest{
get
{
return _stopRequest;
}
set
{
_stopReqest = value;
foreach (var child in WorkerClasses)
child.StopRequest = value;
}
}
Like Rubens said, use an event. What you described basically defines event to a T:
Propagate a property change to other classes.
There is actually a facility in .NET that provides this already, albeit in a generic way: INotifyPropertyChanged. This interface provides a single event, PropertyChanged, that allows a class to notify any listeners of any property change.
In your case, you could easily provide your own interface that is more specific:
interface IStopNotifier
{
event EventHandler StopRequested;
}
This interface would be implemented by your main work manager (whatever it is), and could propagate itself like so:
class WorkManager: IStopNotifier
{
public event EventHandler StopRequested;
protected void OnStopRequested()
{
if (StopRequested != null) StopRequested(this, new EventArgs());
}
public void StopAllWorkers()
{
OnStopRequested();
}
public Worker CreateWorker<T>()
where T: Worker
{
var worker = new T(this);
return worker;
}
}
class abstract Worker: IDisposable
{
public Worker(IStopNotifier stopNotifier)
{
stopNotofier.StopRequested += HandleStopRequested;
}
private IStopNotifier m_stopNotifier;
private bool m_stopRequested = false;
internal void HandleStopRequested(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
m_stopRequested = true;
}
public void Dispose()
{
m_stopNotifier.StopRequested -= HandleStopRequested;
}
}
Why don't to create an event to handle stop requests?