I have a property called PriceChangeInPercentWeekly which has other properties like LastOpenPrice, LastClosePrice, etc.
I am changing these continuously. But how can I raise PropertyChangedEventHandler for PriceChangeInPercentWeekly when a sub-property is changed?
When PriceChangeInPercentWeekly itself is changed, I raised it using my custom SetField function. But how can I do this for sub-properties. Because sub-properties do not know the instanced class, right?
PriceChange priceChangeInPercentWeekly;
public PriceChange PriceChangeInPercentWeekly
{
get => this.priceChangeInPercentWeekly;
set => SetField ( ref this.priceChangeInPercentWeekly, value,
"PriceChangeInPercentWeekly"
);
}
Based on the comments, it sounds like you have a issue with properly binding in a collection case. When dealing with collections in MVVM, there are actually 3 seperate kinds of bindings/Change Notifications you need. If any one is missing, you end up getting issues with non-updates pretty quickly:
Whatever class is holding LastOpenPrice, LastClosePrice, PriceChange and the like - it needs change notificaiton on each and every property. Whatever template you use to display that class, needs to properly bind to each of those properties.
You need change notificaiton if anything is added or removed from the Collection. That is the only change notification ObservableCollection<ClassThatHoldsThosePrices> takes care off.
Whatever property exposes the ObservableList<ClassThatHoldsThosePrices> or its Collection View needs change notificaiton as well. ObservableCollections do not support bulk additions. With a big changes you usually have to build a new list in the background, then replace the whole collection.
At this point it usually becomes a question of properly setting up (or automatically having set up) the 3 kinds of bindings. The proper MVVM pattern is not a easy thing to learn and it can not tell if you did it properly, so it is hard to say where the issues could be. About 8 years ago I wrote a short introducing which I think should still be okay-ish for learning the basics: https://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/vstudio/en-US/b1a8bf14-4acd-4d77-9df8-bdb95b02dbe2/lets-talk-about-mvvm?forum=wpf
Related
I've recently needed to synchronize values from a higher up view model (bound to a custom tab content control) to the base one (bound to the host view) for the CanExecute delegate in the host view to use. The base model has the instance of the top one, among others.
The only thing that I can think of for it to know when a value changes higher up is to subscribe to the PropertyChanged event. But, that seems excessive considering how many times that event would get fired for all of the other properties. It also doesn't feel right for MVVM (but I may be wrong).
Right now, I'm setting it all in a central method in the manager class where the magic happens to make sure the values match up:
If setDealable Then multilegViewModel.IsDealable = isDealable
multilegViewModel.IsIndicative = (Not isDealable)
' [...]
tktViewModel.IsCommandOtherEnabled = (Not isDealable)
tktViewModel.IsCommandBuyEnabled = multilegViewModel.IsBuyButtonEnabled
tktViewModel.IsCommandSellEnabled = multilegViewModel.IsSellButtonEnabled
tktViewModel.IsDealable = isDealable
tktViewModel.IsIndicative = (Not isDealable)
' [...]
But, smaller sets of the "multilegViewModel" properties are being set elsewhere, so I have to find them all and add the copy over. The risk is having another developer leave out such a pairing somewhere.
So, does anyone have ideas other than one view model subscribing to the other to ensure that the values always get set?
Note: The dual language tags are on purpose. It's a mixed language solution, such as the manager being VB.NET, but the models are C#, so I accept suggestions in either one.
UPDATE: I've changed my approach and greatly simplified it, so my initial reason for needing this is no longer valid. But, I may have an edge case or two that could still benefit from this.
Is it possible to just "link" two properties of different ViewModels in a way such that when one property changes, the other one changes too. So in essence, I want two properties in different ViewModels behave as if they were one.
It would be nice if I could just do something like the following in my ViewModels:
WhenPropertyChanges(() => SettingX).CopyValueTo(() => ModelView2.SettingX);
Example: On my settings page, when I change a setting, I want the new value to be available in the ViewModel of another page.
I know I can achieve that with the third Layer (Model), but it feels a bit clunky and the way I solved it for now doesn't feel right (Firing events).
I've implemented following MVVM-Pattern from this page: http://www.wintellect.com/devcenter/krome/linking-property-change-notifications-in-xamarin-forms-or-wpfsilverlight. As far as I understood, the author says his code makes it possible, but unfortunately he doesn't show how.
I also found this article (http://blog.alectucker.com/post/2014/07/26/using-messageingcenter-in-xamarin-forms-for-viewmodel-to-viewmodel-navigation.aspx), but I don't necessarily want to navigate to the other View. Still, maybe I can use this MessagingCenter somehow to achieve my goal?
This is addressed in the final paragraph of my article that you reference. I use a simple extension method to do it. An example of this can be seen in the source code example from the article, in this file: https://github.com/Wintellect/XamarinSamples/blob/master/PropertyDependencyDemo%2FPropertyDependencyDemo%2FMvvm%2FObservableExtensions.cs
For your specific example, it would look something like this:
// using PropertyDependencyDemo.Mvvm;
// ... use the namespace above that contains the ObservableExtensions class
ModelView1
.WhenPropertyChanges((a) => a.SettingX)
.AlsoInvokeAction(() => ModelView2.SettingX = ModelView1.SettingX);
All this does is hook into the PropertyChanged event of the source viewmodel for you in a name-safe way.
One word of caution though: you need to be careful to not create a situation where you inadvertently prevent an object from being garbage collected. The reason this can happen is that in this example, ViewModel1 will now have a PropertyChanged handler that references a PropertyDependency object that in turn references both ModelView1 and ModelView2 due to the captured references in the Action lambda expression.
IF you know for sure that this won't be a problem (perhaps both go out of scope together), then there is nothing to worry about. But if you find yourself facing a situation where you need to prevent ModelView1 from keeping ModelView2 pinned, then you can do so using a WeakReference. Again, this is unlikely to be a concern, but if you find it leaking memory then you can change the above to this:
// assuming "TModelView" is the class name of the viewmodels
var wr = new WeakReference<TModelView>(ModelView2);
ModelView1
.WhenPropertyChanges((a) => a.SettingX)
.AlsoInvokeAction(() => {
TModelView mv;
if (wr.TryGetTarget(out mv))
mv.SettingX = ModelView1.SettingX;
});
I think if the navigation is lineare ( you only need the information of page 1 in page 2 ) you can use the MessagingCenter to do what you want.
If the user is able to change the data in the page 2 ( and be updated in the page 1 ) the messagingCenter is a little to tricky to use. I think you can use the first link you provide. Just use an abstract class with all shared data in your ViewModels.
If you want more help put an more completed code example.
I'm not sure why I should use RaisePropertyChanging, when notifying the view fx:
private LoggingLvl _myLoggingLvl;
public LoggingLvl MyLoggingLvl
{
get { return _myLoggingLvl; }
set
{
RaisePropertyChanging("MyLoggingLvl");
_myLoggingLvl = value;
RaisePropertyChanged("MyLoggingLvl");
}
}
why is it recommended to use RaisePropertyChanging?
Using INotifyPropertyChanging would allow consuming code a chance to consume the previous value of a property, before a change is applied. This is not frequently going to be useful, but there are cases where it might be: if you imagine a property that represents an "active object," this event would allow you to trigger code that would fire when the object is de-activated.
As a contrived example, consider a UI where the change in value of a field is required to display in a specific way: the old value should "float" off the screen leaving the new value behind. If a model class implemented INotifyPropertyChanging, a viewmodel class could attach to this event in order to cache the old value for use in the float animation. This allows the model class to represent the current state, while the viewmodel can maintain all values necessary to drive the UI.
I have never listened before that RaisePropertyChanging is recommended. You can use it if you need to notify to "outside world" that specified property is going to changed.
This can be useful, for example, when some parts of your application should validate the changing property state against other parameters of your system, so may be also signal that it's not a subject to change, as following Single Responsibility Principle your class may not be aware of states of other instances of types of your application.
The INotifyPropertyChanging interface is used to notify clients, typically binding clients, that a property value is changing.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.componentmodel.inotifypropertychanging.aspx
assume for a long running validation task on your property. hope take 5 seconds for updating the property value. meanwhile some other property are are looking for it these properties are treated under race condition. and wait under a queue and one property changed notification done then the first object will get change to get or set the property value.
let me give you some examples.
This is more of an architecture / design question.
I have run into a few projects in the past written in WPF/Windows Forms, etc. that have complex screens with a lot of fields and these fields are connected to each other (their values depend on each other with some logic involved).
These projects I have taken on after they were implemented, and I found a lot of events / data bind hell - what I mean by this is that because all these fields are depending on others they have implemented INotifyPropertyChanged and other fields are being modified as a result. This causes the same fields being updated 5-6 times when the screen loads and the order in which fields are populated causes horrible bugs. (For example, Date was set before Job Type, instead of after Job Type, so I end up with a different Job Fee.)
To make matters worse, some hacks are implemented on UI events (for example, DropDown changed to update field X) while others are in the domain model that the UI binds to.
Basically, it's a huge mess, and I just want to know what the best way to implement something like this is if I was to start from scratch. Or is it a good idea to avoid such a complex screen in the first place?
I would try to keep the business logic out of the property setters as much as possible.
First of all, if several properties are needed for one calculation, I'd write one method that does the calculation, and call that method when appropriate. E.g. if all different combinations of property values make sense, one could just call the method in the setters of each property, making sure that the same code runs any time one of the properties is changed. If you only can evaluate special combinations of property values, you could either implement a command and let the user decide when to calculate the resulting changes, or you could provide feedback through validation, and only evaluate the property changes if the combination is valid. If there are several interdependent properties, I often use a "ChangeInitiator" variable to indicate what property has changed, so that it is clear in the calculation method which property is responsible for the change and which others should change as a result. Basically, this is the same as doing one part of the calculation in each property setter, but I find that it helps me to keep an overview of things if the different parts of the relationship are all in one method.
In a program I wrote once, I had some calculations running on a background thread periodically, so I would just set a flag whenever a piece of data changed that required a new calculation, and do all the updates based on a timer every second or so... that could also help you get the logic more straight, and it avoids to have the calculation run several times for one set of related changes.
With regard to change notification, I'd really try to only use it for UI data binding.
We have fairly complex UIs (including several related fields of different types in, say for example a Row in a DataGrid) and the MVVM pattern has worked pretty well for us. All the properties coming from the Model and exposed to the View that have complex logic related are "wrapped" by an equivalent property in the ViewModel, which has no Backing Field, but rather points directly to the Model:
public class SomeComplexViewModel
{
public SomeModel Model {get;set;}
public string SomeCrazyProperty
{
get
{
return Model.SomeCrazyProperty;
}
{
Model.SomeCrazyProperty = value;
//... Some crazy logic here, potentially modifying some other properties as well.
}
}
}
<TextBox Text="{Binding SomeCrazyProperty}"/>
This removes the "initial value" problem, as the initial value read by the Binding is actually the real value coming from the Model, and thus the logic placed in the Setter is executed only when needed.
Then, for dummy properties (which have no logic behind), we bind directly from the View to the Model:
<TextBox Text="{Binding Model.SomeRegularProperty}"/>
This reduces the bloat in the ViewModel.
With regard to events in the code behind, I totally avoid that. My code behind files are almost always one InitializeComponent() and nothing else.
Only View-Specific logic is placed in the code behind (such as animations stuff, etc), when it cannot be directly done in XAML, or is easier to do in code (which is not the case most of the time).
Edit:
It's important to mention that the winforms binding capabilities are a joke compared to the XAML-based ones. could that be the cause you're seeing those horrible messes in those projects?
I am developing a WPF application using MVVM architect, and as a common scenario using properites to Notify Changes like
public List<EmployeeInfo> Employees
{
get
{
return _employees;
}
set
{
_employees = value;
NotifyPropertyChanged(() => Employees);
}
}
My only issue is that i am using property setter to notify application about the changes made to some value, and according to FxCop this is a bad practice and 'CollectionPropertiesShouldBeReadOnly'. So i want to improve a little bit on that, so tell me some mechanism with which i could use Notify Property changed without using setter.
If your collection property is read-only, you don't need to notify anything that the entire collection has changed to a different one - instead, the event handlers on the collection will be notified of changes within the collection (the addition of items etc).
If you need to be able to change which collection the property refers to within the view model, you could always make the setter private and keep the existing notification mechanism.
The ObservableCollection itself informs about changes happened. So you don't need to raise the PropertyChanged Event. If you think, that it's necessary tho change the collection, then you can delete and add items. Due to the observable pattern, the changes will be anounced.
The fact that you are using a setter means you're trying to replace the instance of the collection with a new object instance. If you just are worried about changes to items in the collection, that's already built into the observablecollection. FxCop is going to complain about the setter whether you had the notifypropertychanges call or not.