We Keep Coding

How do I run a method from a relative ViewModel and get its return value?

To better show my problem, I drew a graph of how my ViewModel hierarchy looks like so far:
ViewModel hierarchy
What I want to achieve is simply call a method from ScriptEditorViewModel and ask it, if the object, which is currently being edited inside EditObjectViewModel has been specified in the script.
Later I also want to send some information to ScriptEditorViewModel and make it generate a script for the object if it doesn't exist.
ScriptEditorViewModel and ProjectManagementViewModel are 2 separate tabs in my program, which are basically operating at the same time.
Is it possible to do that and if so, is it a good approach?
Note: I'm currently using ReactiveUI as my MVVM framework but any other MVVM solution is also welcome.

When using MVVM pattern, you want to decouple components.
In View part there is xaml with bindings to data and command present in ViewModel.
In ViewModel you should keep data that is presented and logic that does something with that data. It is not the wisest thing to couple multiple ViewModels - keep their logic separated. If you have a command method, all data it deals with should be present in its ViewModel. For anything more complex, you shoud consider communicating with some kind of service or database.
Hence comes the Model part. Here you want to create the model of something you want to store and not necessary present in a View.
I don't know if I understood your problem well, but including a database or any kind of 'persistence layer' into your solution should resolve the problem of accessing specific information. You can create some in-memory storage for start.

How to structure my project to use x:Bind

After beeing used to structure my project in WPF on a light MVVM pattern, I'm looking into WINUI for a new project.
In the elapsed time, UWP and x:Bind did appear and it looks like the pattern can be much lighter. The whole concept of ViewModel has changed (maybe in a better way).
I'm looking for a "correct and maintainable" way to use x:Bind, to display Properties and call a function from a class.
In my App.xaml, I'm declaring a Configuration which contains all the sub-instances. Let's say a Camera. This Camera has an IP, and a method to call from the UI. What is the minimum code to be able to call and display those ?
For the moment, I have created a CameraView which is a UserControl. I have declared a public Camera object inside, which I can call and display but I don't see the way to affect this from my Configuration. This "link" between the view and the model.
Thank you for the help.

Of course there is a simpler way to implement MVVM: Microsoft itself shows how in its own samples, on GitHub.
However, to summarize it all, have a look at my answer in this question: How to pass data between pages
There I show, step after step, how to easily implement a working pattern to have a “shell” that holds all the app’s data.
Best regards

How is MVVM in Xamarin.Forms/UWP/WPF any different from using code behind?

In learning Xamarin.Forms/UWP/WPF tutorials always tout MVVM as the design pattern of choice and I've followed suite, but I've never understood why. To contrast, in asp.net MVC the templated framework is used to great effect, Controllers deliver models to the view (HTML of some sort).
But in the Xamarin.Forms/UWP/WPF and others, we create a completely new class, ignore the code-behind file that cannot be removed and relegate it to telling our view where to look when binding data.
The only reason I could think of that makes MVVM better is if we could supply logic where different VM's could be 'injected' into the same view, maybe that would justify it.Though I have no idea how to do that.
Otherwise, how is creating a view model class better than using the code behind file? Is it really worse separation of concerns just because the view and code behind have the same name and are instantiated together?

MVVM pattern is much cleaner than using code-behind.
Separation of concerns
Imagine you have a view and a code-behind implemented. Now the business comes with a request to completely change the way the controls are presented - replacing them with new controls, changing layout and so on. Chances are, you will be forced to rewrite a lot of code just to satisfy the requirement, because the code-behind is directly tied to the view.
Now in case you have MVVM in place, you can easily swap the View part of the equation for any view which utilizes data binding to the right properties in a View model. You could easily present a single View model in several different ways - like creating multiple different views for different user roles while the view model stays exactly the same, you just choose what to display and how.
What view model actually creates is a middle layer between data and their presentation and makes it possible to more easily transform the data the view uses and change the presentation without affecting the view model if the interface is kept intact.
Data binding
Also if you are meaning purely code-behind without data-binding, the advantages of MVVM become even clearer. When you have a data-bound property that updates after user input in a TwoWay manner, for example if you have a form the user has to fill out, you don't have to remember to fetch the latest "changes" from the control using Text property, you know the latest version is already there in the data-bound property. In addition, you can add validation in the property setter, you can update other properties in the setter as well to orchestrate data handling in a much more abstract way than with code-behind approach, where you are tied to events and having to remember where the data come from and which specific controls and which specific properties you have to update. Imagine you display a given text in multiple places - with data binding you just set a single property and rely on {Binding} to display the text in all bound controls. With code-behind only, you need to remember which concrete controls display the text and when you add a new control, you have to update the code-behind appropriately, which is far less convenient.
Cross platform development
Another example would be having to develop a cross-platform application with native UI using MvvmCross. Here you can decide that some views or some functionality will not be available for certain OS or that you want to just implement it later. This is entirely possible - you just don't provide the UI for that functionality and the view model can stay the same.
View state
Finally - having all view state in code-behind means that when you navigate away, you must store the state somehow and restore it when navigating back because a new page is created. With MVVM you may decide to keep the view models of the navigation stack in memory and when navigating back just set the DataContext of the page to the existing view model instance to get back just in the same state as you left off.
Overall I see MVVM as a great pattern to improve flexibility of your codebase and it makes your solution more future-proof and resilient to changes.

pattern best way to connect View to multiple Controllers?

I'm recently doing a purchase order program using the MVC pattern in C# (not ASP.NET web app, just a desktop program). Now the problem is that in the UI there are lots of buttons that will link to another section, let's say from the order page I can click and go to the inventory page. Each section of course have their own set of MVC.
How can I connect the button to other controller while maintaining abstraction? That is each view does not have to understand how the other controller works, or what parameters it requires to work.
There are a couple of design possibilities that comes to mind but I have no idea which one is better / simpler:
The dirty way: just put the references to all the required controllers in one view, but this way reduce abstraction.
Shared view space: each button is a different view that has their own controller, but then I need to have view manager of some sort.
Routing: pretty much like ASP. NET RedirectToAction, make a custom router that use common type (like string) to determine which controller and which action to perform
Custom button for each action: for each controller and each action I make a button class just for it. Then I need a way for the view to supply the required parameters to each button.
Any suggestion on what should I do?

What i think that you should for the "shared view" i.e create on shared view containing all of that buttons and their calls if this is not working for you then you can create a saprate calls of WebAPI in their controller to get your date in return.

I decided to use a modification to my 4th option, a factory pattern that creates all my buttons. The factory is given the references to all the controllers and initializes all the buttons accordingly.
The view only need this factory during construction and ask for any of the button it can produce.
This way the view doesn't need to know anything about the controller during construction. The controller also doesn't need to know the view at all.
Thanks for everyone sharing their opinion.

Struggling to understand MVVM architecture

I'm trying to learn MVVM and WPF and I'm using the MVVM Light Toolkit. Here's what I'm not fully understanding and maybe it's due to an incorrect architecture of my UI.
What I'm trying to accomplish is pretty simple actually. This is a utility application by the way. I want a window that serves as the 'controller' so-to-say that has a set of buttons. Each button should change the content of a frame. Example: one button loads a 'screen' ( or a 'view' if you will ) that allows the user to configure an 'Agency' which is a custom object. Another button loads a list of Users from the Agency that was in the first 'screen'. This 'Users' view needs to also be loaded in the same frame. In fact, as of right now, the window with all the buttons really is only responsible for loading the 'screens' in the frame. The meat of the application will be within all the separate 'screens'
What I am not understanding is 1) how to let each screen/view know about each other since one is dependent upon the other. It seems that in MVVM the ViewModel shouldn't know about anything. But in my case, I need to pass information around ( such as my Agency ).
If I can get some hints on what I need to look into, that would be great.
Thanks!

Some ideas that might connect some of the dots:
You'll most likely have one viewmodel per view ("screen").
Each viewmodel will contain all of the logic for its corresponding view
Viewmodels can and will know about the models (Agency, Users)
Viewmodels can communicate with each other via the Messenger in MVVM Light
Think of MVVM Light's Messenger as an "application-wide eventing system". When you send a message out from one view model, any other view model can be listening for that message/event and react to it as needed.
Does that help at all? Keep your thoughts coming and I'll keep commenting and I'm sure the community will as well :)

Few things:
each of your screens, should be separate view (eg. user control or new window - I suppose you've done that already)
every part of model (eg. Agency, User) you want to display in your application, should be wrapped with its dedicated view model
your views don't really need to know about each other; you can use commands or events on view models to get rid of those dependencies
view model only needs to know about one thing: model it's building on
it's good to think about view as really simple class, with one single responsibility of rendering content; no logic, no code behind (unless it's purely UI/display related) is something to follow
You can try to prepare your models first (if you haven't done that already), then make view models for them (thinking what properties of models you want to expose to views) and once that's ready, build your views basing on view models. Other way around is also viable option - pick whichever feels more natural to you.
One more thing: since you mentioned you can display several screens in one (I assume) main area, think about equipping your view models with something along the lines of bool IsCurrentlyActive property. This way, you can easily show/hide views with button clicks and still utilize binding mechanism.

They shouldn't know about each other. That is what the Messenger is for controllers and views subscribe to the events they are interested in. That way they don't need to know or care where they event originated.
Hmm Kendrick is faster. What he said.
Also it sounds like you kind of want an Outlook type interface, some navigation that loads other views. I had the same question a while ago. How to do Regions in WPF without Prism?

To better understand the MVVM pattern look at this article: WPF Apps With The Model-View-ViewModel Design Pattern
Also I advice you to look at Caliburn Micro framework.