I have a method to make an order,
public async Task<bool> Order(Request request)
{
// Each step does different things.
await Step1(request);
await Step2(request);
await Step3(request);
await Step4(request);
...
await StepN(request);
}
public async Task<bool> Step1(Request request)
{
var amount1 = await changeSomething1(request);
await Pay1(amount1);
}
public async Task<bool> Step2(Request request)
{
var amount2 = await changeSomething2(request);
await Pay2(amount2);
}
public async Task<bool> StepX(Request request)
{
var amountX = await changeSomethingX(request);
await PayX(amountX);
}
Now I need to preview the Order without any PayX(amount) is called. I don't want to add a boolen parameter to skip it, like the following code, which looks pretty ugly.
public async Task<bool> Order(Request request, bool preview = false)
{
await Step1(request, preview);
await Step2(request, preview);
await Step3(request, preview);
await Step4(request, preview);
....
await StepN(request, preview);
}
public async Task<bool> StepX(Request request, bool preview = false)
{
var amountX = await changeSomethingX(request);
if(!preview) await PayX(amountX);
}
What pattern can be applied here? Thanks a lot.
It seems to me that you need some middleware-like pattern (Just like middlewares in Asp.Net for example). That's my proposal:
First create An OrderMiddleware class that encapsulates your 2 methods, Step and Pay. In this case we pass step and pay as delegates to the constructor to achieve maximum flexibility
public delegate Task<int> StepDelegate(Request request);
public delegate Task PayDelegate(int amount);
public class OrderMiddleware
{
// Private fields
private readonly StepDelegate _step;
private readonly PayDelegate _pay;
// Initialization
public OrderMiddleware(StepDelegate step, PayDelegate pay)
{
_step = step;
_pay = pay;
}
// Public
public async Task Order(Request request, bool preview)
{
var amount = await _step.Invoke(request);
if (!preview)
await _pay.Invoke(amount);
}
}
Then you need a class to handle a list of OrderMiddlewares that represent your complete pipeline.
public class OrderPipeline
{
// Private fields
private readonly List<OrderMiddleware> _orderMiddlewares;
// Initialization
public OrderPipeline()
{
_orderMiddlewares = new()
{
new(Step1, Pay1),
new(Step2, Pay2)
};
}
// Order Handling
public async Task Order(Request request, bool preview = false)
{
foreach(var middleware in _orderMiddlewares)
await middleware.Order(request, preview);
}
// Middlewares
public async Task Step1(Request request)
{
var amount1 = await changeSomething1(request);
await Pay1(amount1);
}
public async Task Step2(Request request)
{
var amount2 = await changeSomething2(request);
await Pay2(amount2);
}
}
In this way you order method can work with a list of middlwares.
Just few notes:
If you need to pass other parameters to every middleware, in addiction to the preview bool, consider to create a OrderConfiguration class that encapsulates all these data, and pass it instead. In that way the signature remains clean and you do not need to do any refactoring
Maybe you want to separate you middleware registration logic from your OrderPipeline class in order to not violate the open-closed principle:
public class OrderPipeline
{
// Private fields
private readonly List<OrderMiddleware> _orderMiddlewares = new();
// Order Handling
public async Task Order(Request request, bool preview = false)
{
foreach(var middleware in _orderMiddlewares)
await middleware.Order(request, preview);
}
public void AddMiddleware(OrderMiddleware orderMiddleware)
{
_orderMiddlewares.Add(orderMiddleware);
}
}
Related
How can i await for a Task and return its result and putting the results of the Task into a BindableCollection.
Having trouble with the syntax for (return await Task.Run()) and putting it into a BindableCollection.
Basically what iam trying todo is to await for the result of the method, return it and put it into a BindableCollection in ViewModel and binding to the ItemsControl.
I looked up for some examples in multiple threads, unfortuneatly none of the threads contains anything about BindableCollection.
I can only guess that i have to Convert somehow the Generic List to IEnumerable, though i have no clue how.
public class DataAccess : Conductor<object>
{
public async Task<List<DataModel>> Starter(IProgress<ProgressReportModel> progress, CancellationToken cancellationToken)
{
List<DataModel> output = new List<DataModel>();
//What i tried so far
return await ScannerAsync(progress, cancellationToken);
List<GameDataModel>> output = await ScannerAsync(progress, cancellationToken);
}
private static async Task<List<DataModel>> ScannerAsync(IProgress<ProgressReportModel> progress, CancellationToken cs)
{
await Task.Run(() =>
{
Do Stuff
}).ConfigureAwait(true);
await Task.Run(() =>
{
Do Stuff and return output.
}).ConfigureAwait(true);
}
}
public class ViewModel : Conductor<object>
{
private BindableCollection<DataModel> Data { get; set; }
private CancellationTokenSource cts = new CancellationTokenSource();
private Progress<ProgressReportModel> progress = new Progress<ProgressReportModel>();
public void StartScan()
{
DataAccess da = new DataAccess();
Data = new BindableCollection<DataModel>(da.Starter(progress, cts.Token));
// ERROR: Cannot Convert from Tasks.Task to Generic.IEnumerable
}
}
Your code tries to convert the Task to BindableCollection, you'd want to convert the RESULT of the task instead, to do it you need to await the da.Start call:
Data = new BindableCollection<DataModel>(await da.Starter(progress, cts.Token));
You may need to tweak the signature of your StartScan method to
public async Task StartScan()
I try to wait for the class to be finished with instantiate.
My architecture is the following. Cook is inheriade from CookChief.
And if I instantiate cook, CookChief is creating himself, but CookChief is calling 1 other class named Cookhelper the cookhelper is waiting for a input and for this input method i want to wait in Cook.
The thing is iam creating this in MVVM Galasoft and my entry point is the CookViewmodel, with a relaycommand.
In the code below you can see my architecture. To say it short I want to wait until this bool processed = await Task.Run(() => ValidateForDeviceId()); is finished.
My first step was to outsource the constructer of each class. And create a init method.
This is my code:
public CookViewModel()
{
startCookButtonCommand = new RelayCommand(Cook);
}
private async Task Cook()
{
cook.Init();
}
public class Cook : CookChief
{
public Cook()
{
}
public async Task Init()
{
await this.CookChiefInit();
//here I want to wait until CookChiefInit is finished
Cooking();
}
public void Cooking()
{
MessageBox.Show("Input received");
}
}
Now the Cookchief:
public Cookchief()
{
}
protected async Task CookchiefInit()
{
this.Cookhelper = new Cookhelper();
Cookhelper.CookHelperInit();
}
And in the CookHelper we do this:
public CookHelper()
{
}
public void CookHelperInit()
{
this.driverWindow = new DriverWindow();
startProc();
}
private async void startProc()
{
ShowOrCloseDriverWindow(true);
//this is the task what we wait for before we can repeat
bool processed = await Task.Run(() => ValidateForDeviceId());
if(processed)
{
ShowOrCloseDriverWindow(false);
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("DriverError");
}
}
private bool ValidateForDeviceId()
{
for (; ; )
{
this.deviceId = Input.deviceId;
if (deviceId > 0)
{
break;
}
}
return true;
}
Per the discussion in the comments, the problem here was that the initialization routine mixed synchronous and asynchronous methods and calls. Additionally, some async methods were called without the await keyword. The solution was to make all calls asynchronous and await them.
cook.Init() needs an await:
private async Task Cook()
{
await cook.Init();
}
In CookchiefInit(), the CookHelperInit() call needs to be awaited:
protected async Task CookchiefInit()
{
this.Cookhelper = new Cookhelper();
Cookhelper.CookHelperInit();
}
In order to await CookHelperInit(), it needs to be made asynchronous. The startProc() call is to an async method, so it must also be awaited:
public async Task CookHelperInit()
{
this.driverWindow = new DriverWindow();
await startProc();
}
I have these functions
public async Task<List<Machine>> GetMachines()
{
await Initialize();
await SyncMachines();
return await machineTable.ToListAsync();
}
public async Task InsertMachines(List<Machine> machines)
{
await Initialize();
await Task.WhenAll(machines.Select(m => machineTable.InsertAsync(m)));
await SyncMachines();
}
I am writing a parent class to put these functions in, such that the functions getMachines() and InsertMachines() become getObject and InsertObject where the List<Machine> can be a list of any objects, so they can return and accept any type of list
How do I declare functions like this?
According to your description, I created my azure sync table class as follows, you could refer to it:
public class AzureCloudSyncTable<TModel> where TModel : class
{
public static MobileServiceClient MobileService = new MobileServiceClient(
"https://{your-mobile-app-name}.azurewebsites.net"
);
private IMobileServiceSyncTable<TModel> syncTable = MobileService.GetSyncTable<TModel>();
#region Offline sync
private async Task InitLocalStoreAsync()
{
if (!MobileService.SyncContext.IsInitialized)
{
var store = new MobileServiceSQLiteStore("localstore.db");
store.DefineTable<TModel>();
await MobileService.SyncContext.InitializeAsync(store);
}
await SyncAsync();
}
private async Task SyncAsync()
{
await PushAsync();
await syncTable.PullAsync(typeof(TModel).Name, syncTable.CreateQuery());
}
private async Task PushAsync()
{
try
{
await MobileService.SyncContext.PushAsync();
}
catch (MobileServicePushFailedException ex)
{
if (ex.PushResult != null)
{
foreach (var error in ex.PushResult.Errors)
{
await ResolveConflictAsync(error);
}
}
}
}
private async Task ResolveConflictAsync(MobileServiceTableOperationError error)
{
//var serverItem = error.Result.ToObject<TModel>();
//var localItem = error.Item.ToObject<TModel>();
//// Note that you need to implement the public override Equals(TModel item)
//// method in the Model for this to work
//if (serverItem.Equals(localItem))
//{
// // Items are the same, so ignore the conflict
// await error.CancelAndDiscardItemAsync();
// return;
//}
//// Client Always Wins
//localItem.Version = serverItem.Version;
//await error.UpdateOperationAsync(JObject.FromObject(localItem));
// Server Always Wins
//await error.CancelAndDiscardItemAsync();
}
#endregion
#region public methods
public async Task<List<TModel>> GetAll()
{
await InitLocalStoreAsync();
await SyncAsync();
return await syncTable.ToListAsync();
}
public async Task Insert(List<TModel> items)
{
await InitLocalStoreAsync();
await Task.WhenAll(items.Select(item => syncTable.InsertAsync(item)));
await PushAsync();
}
#endregion
}
Additionally, for more details about Handling Conflict Resolution, you could refer to adrian hall's book here.
I try to test a class with NUnit that contains async methods. I don't know how to do it in a correct way.
I have a class with that looks like this:
public class EditorViewModel:INotifyPropertyChanged
{
public void SetIdentifier(string identifier)
{
CalcContentAsync();
}
private async void CalcContentAsync()
{
await SetContentAsync();
DoSomething();
}
private async Task SetContentAsync()
{
Content = await Task.Run<object>(() => CalculateContent());
RaisePropertyChanged("Content");
}
public object Content { get; private set; }
...
}
How can I write a Test in NUnit, that checks, that the Content-Property is set to the right value? I want to do something like that:
[Test]
public void Content_WhenModifierIsXXX_ReturnsSomeViewModel()
{
var viewModel = new EditorViewModel();
viewModel.SetIdentifier("XXX");
Assert.That(viewModel.Content, Is.InstanceOf<ISomeContentViewModel>());
}
But that doesn't work. Because the asynchronous code has not been executed before the assertion.
Your SetIdentifier method is async too (or you need to make it async because you wait operation inside it. Then your method can looks like next one:
public async Task SetIdentifier(string identifier)
{
await SetContentAsync();
DoSomething();
}
And now you can just await it in your unit test:
[Test]
public async Task Content_WhenModifierIsXXX_ReturnsSomeViewModel()
{
var viewModel = new EditorViewModel();
await viewModel.SetIdentifier("XXX");
Assert.That(viewModel.Content, Is.InstanceOf<ISomeContentViewModel>());
}
You can also use workaround to call your test in a sync manner:
[Test]
public async Task Content_WhenModifierIsXXX_ReturnsSomeViewModel()
{
Task.Run(async () =>
{
var viewModel = new EditorViewModel();
await viewModel.SetIdentifier("XXX");
Assert.That(viewModel.Content, Is.InstanceOf<ISomeContentViewModel>());
}).GetAwaiter().GetResult();
}
Via MSDN Magazine.
When working with async you should always return a Task. Otherwise it would be "fire and forget", and you have absolutely no way of interacting with the Task.
Therefore you should change the signature of SetIdentifier to return a Task, like this:
public async Task SetIdentifier(string identifier)
{
await SetContentAsync();
DoSomething();
}
Then you can wait for the operation to complete in the test:
[Test]
public async void Content_WhenModifierIsXXX_ReturnsSomeViewModel()
{
var viewModel = new EditorViewModel();
await viewModel.SetIdentifier("XXX");
Assert.That(viewModel.Content, Is.InstanceOf<ISomeContentViewModel>());
}
Or, if your test runner does not support async:
[Test]
public void Content_WhenModifierIsXXX_ReturnsSomeViewModel()
{
var viewModel = new EditorViewModel();
viewModel.SetIdentifier("XXX").Wait();
Assert.That(viewModel.Content, Is.InstanceOf<ISomeContentViewModel>());
}
I have a simple Web API method that looks like this:
public async Task<HttpResponseMessage> RunTask(TaskType taskType)
{
var taskId = await TaskManager.CreateTask(taskType);
TaskManager.Run(taskId);
return new HttpResponseMessage
{
StatusCode = HttpStatusCode.OK,
Content =
new StringContent($"Task {taskType.GetDescription()} was started.")
};
}
TaskManager.Run is decalared like this:
public async Task Run(int id)
I was expecting it to return "Task was started" message immediately after TaskManager.Run(taskId) But the request continues to run synchronously.
But if to replace the call TaskManager.Run(taskId) with:
Task.Run(() => Thread.Sleep(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(100)));
Then it runs asynchronously.
So I believe this is something to do with the resources shared by TaskManager and main thread. Can a shared resource lock the execution?
I'm using Castle Windsor. One WindsorContainer container is declared in Web API project.
TaskManager utilizes BaseTaskRunner class inside of it. One more WindsorContainer is declared in BaseTaskRunner.
Web API's container uses LifeStyle.PerWebRequest for all components. BaseTaskRunner's container uses LifeStyle.Singleton (not sure if it's correct LifeStyle). Could the call be locked for example by DdContext or other classes declared in both of the containers?
UPD:
I don't want to wait the TaskManager.Run to complete. But what happens is that return statement still waits for the TaskManager.Run to complete (even without await statement on TaskManager.Run).
In other words it does not matter how I call the TaskManager.Run:
TaskManager.Run(taskId);
or
await TaskManager.Run(taskId);
It waits for TaskManager.Run to complete in both cases.
Here is the code of TaskManager:
public class TaskManager : ITaskManager
{
public IRepository<BackgroundTask> TaskRepository { get; set; }
public async Task<int> CreateTask(TaskType type, byte[] data = null, object config = null)
{
var task = new BackgroundTask
{
Type = type,
Status = BackgroundTaskStatus.New,
Config = config?.SerializeToXml(),
Created = DateTime.Now,
Data = data
};
TaskRepository.Add(task);
TaskRepository.SaveChanges();
return task.Id;
}
public async Task Run(int id, bool removeOnComplete = true)
{
var task = TaskRepository.GetById(id);
Run(task, removeOnComplete);
}
public async Task Run(TaskType type, bool removeOnComplete = true)
{
var tasksToRun = TaskRepository.Get(t => t.Type == type);
tasksToRun.ForEachAsync(t => Run(t, removeOnComplete));
}
public async Task Run(BackgroundTask task, bool removeOnComplete = true)
{
switch (task.Type)
{
case TaskType.SpreadsheetImport:
new SpreadsheetImportTaskRunner().Run(task);
break;
}
}
}
And some other classes:
public class SpreadsheetImportTaskRunner : BaseTaskRunner
{
public IForecastSpreadsheetManager SpreadsheetManager { get; set; }
protected override void Execute()
{
SpreadsheetManager.ImportActuals(Task.Data);
}
protected override void Initialize()
{
base.Initialize();
SpreadsheetManager = _container.Resolve<IForecastSpreadsheetManager>();
}
}
BaseTaskRunner:
public class BaseTaskRunner
{
public IRepository<BackgroundTask> TaskRepository { get; set; }
protected IWindsorContainer _container = new WindsorContainer();
protected BackgroundTask Task { get; set; }
public async Task Run(BackgroundTask task)
{
Initialize();
Task = task;
try
{
Execute();
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
SetError(ex.ToString());
}
}
protected virtual void Execute()
{
}
protected virtual void Initialize()
{
_container.Install(new TaskRunnerComponentsInstaller());
TaskRepository = _container.Resolve<IRepository<BackgroundTask>>();
}
}
I still believe this is something to do with the WindsorContainer and common classes which are resolved in several different threads.
The issue is that you're not using await on the Task being returned from the invocation of the TaskManager.Run function. Consider the below:
public async Task<HttpResponseMessage> RunTask(TaskType taskType)
{
var taskId = await TaskManager.CreateTask(taskType);
await TaskManager.Run(taskId);
return new HttpResponseMessage
{
StatusCode = HttpStatusCode.OK,
Content =
new StringContent($"Task {taskType.GetDescription()} was started.")
};
}
Now it will work asynchronously as you'd expect. The await sets a continuation marker in the async state-machine, instructing it to return to this portion of the method upon completion of the asynchronous operation defined in the TaskManager.Run.
UPDATE
You are missing lots of await statements, and there are times where you need to not mark methods as async. It appears as though there are some mis-understandings as it pertains to these keywords. Here is what your TaskManager class should look like.
public class TaskManager : ITaskManager
{
public IRepository<BackgroundTask> TaskRepository { get; set; }
public async Task<int> CreateTask(TaskType type,
byte[] data = null,
object config = null)
{
var task = new BackgroundTask
{
Type = type,
Status = BackgroundTaskStatus.New,
Config = config?.SerializeToXml(),
Created = DateTime.Now,
Data = data
};
TaskRepository.Add(task);
TaskRepository.SaveChanges();
return task.Id;
}
public ask Run(int id, bool removeOnComplete = true)
{
var task = TaskRepository.GetById(id);
return Run(task, removeOnComplete);
}
public Task Run(TaskType type, bool removeOnComplete = true)
{
var tasksToRun = TaskRepository.Get(t => t.Type == type);
return tasksToRun.ForEachAsync(t => Run(t, removeOnComplete));
}
public Task Run(BackgroundTask task, bool removeOnComplete = true)
{
switch (task.Type)
{
case TaskType.SpreadsheetImport:
return new SpreadsheetImportTaskRunner().Run(task);
break;
}
}
}
}
Ideally, if the method is marked as a return type of Task and the method doesn't need to unwind any tasks within its execution it can simply return the Task functionality for its implementation. For example, notice how dramatically my TaskManager class differs from yours -- I'm only marking methods as async that need to actually await. These two keywords should be married, if a method uses async there should be an await. But only use await if the method needs to unwind and use the asynchronous operation.