I'm creating two objects and assign them with a data from IsolatedStorage.
But when I change one object the second one changes too. ( I think the problem may be the pointers are the same, but I can't solve it. )
private ArrayOfClsSimpleData lstUsers;
private ArrayOfClsSimpleData tmpLstUsers;
in class' globals
tmpLstUsers = IsolatedStorageHelper.GetObject<ArrayOfClsSimpleData>("users");
lstUsers = IsolatedStorageHelper.GetObject<ArrayOfClsSimpleData>("users");
The first status of the arrays:
Debug.Write(lstUsers.Count)
Output: 2
Debug.Write(tmpLstUsers.Count)
Output: 2
The counts are the same as expected. But, after I add an item to one list, the other list gets updated too and the counts are still same.
lstUsers.Add(new ArrayOfClsSimpleData());
Debug.Write(lstUsers.Count)
Output: 3
Debug.Write(tmpLstUsers.Count)
Output: 3
EDIT : IsolatedStorageHelper class is something to help to get objects, save object etc. that I do use for simplifying things, so just think it as getting objects from IsolatedStorage.
it is implemented like this:
public static T GetObject<T>(string key)
{
if (IsolatedStorageSettings.ApplicationSettings.Contains(key))
{
return (T)IsolatedStorageSettings.ApplicationSettings[key]; // return the object
}
return default(T); // if key doesn't exists , return default object
}
So it just gets it from IsolatedStorage.
If you don't know isolated storage you can see it from here
So, how can I fix the code so that I can change one without changing the other?
So, basically lstUsers and tmpLstUsers are references to the same object. All you have to do is to create a new one and copy content from the original. If you need a quick solution, then you can do it like this (code below). I just guess that ArrayOfClsSimpleData is some kind of array.
lstUsers = IsolatedStorageHelper.GetObject<ArrayOfClsSimpleData>("myKey");
tmpLstUsers = new ArrayOfClsSimpleData();
foreach (object user in lstUsers) // I don't know the type of objects in ArrayOfClsSimpleData, so I wrote 'object', but you should use the actual type
tmpLstUsers.Add(user);
The problem is that IsolatedStorage is just returning two pointers to the same data. So unless you copy the data, all changes will ultimately be to the same underlying data.
Think of it as two copies of your home address. Anything you change on your home affects all copies of your address since it is just an address and not the home itself.
What you will want to do is clone your object. Built in collections have clone or copy methods built in to do shallow copies, or if you built something yourself you will need to implement it yourself
The easiest way is to implement the IClonable interface and to use the clone method to achieve your copying.
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/System.ICloneable.aspx
This basically involves going through and calling member wise clone for each complex object (which will copy all value types for you)
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.object.memberwiseclone.aspx
I don't think cloning is necessary. Just create a new list instead of operating on the same instance. You can do that by calling ToList() on the returned instance:
lstUsers = IsolatedStorageHelper.GetObject<ArrayOfClsSimpleData>("myKey").ToList();
Can't you use the Clone() method of IClonable while fetching the object? looks like both list objects are getting same reference objects.
Related
I have defined a list of objects as List<NewLayerCounterMethod> NewLayer = new List<NewLayerCounterMethod>(); where each object within the class NewLayerCounterMethod has four properties such as: VehicleType, VehicleCounter,Counter,Updating.
The number of objects NewLayer is 10 and I want to copy NewLayer[7] into NewLayer[5] such that if NewLayer[7] is changed, NewLayer[5] will not be changed.
Please note that I do not want to make a new object while I want to replace the properties of one object with those of another object which makes it somehow different from other questions on Stackoverflow and I think it is not a duplication.
You need to clone the object, as otherwise you would just store the reference and in both fields and change them both. See this answers:
Creating a copy of an object in C#
How do you do a deep copy of an object in .NET (C# specifically)?
In that case you need to add a function to your NewLayerCounterMethod class, in which you copy all the properties of the other class to the new one. It would look somewhat like that then:
public void TakeProperties(NewLayerCounterMethod otherObject)
{
propA = otherObject.propA;
propB = otherObject.propB;
//And so on for all properties left
}
You could add guards so that you only update the properties if the new value is different to the old one, but I suggest to add those guards directly to the properties.
The above method is than called like that:
NewLayer[5].TakeProperties(NewLayer[7]);
I am trying to get the actual object that is contained within a list that itself is contained within a task.
e.g. method has the following signature e.g.
public async Task<List<Dictionary<string,object>>> GetData()
i am currently using something like this:
var member = type.GetMembers()[0];
var returntype = member.ReturnType.GetGenericArguments();
var temp = member.ReturnType.GetGenericArguments()[0];
if (temp.GetGenericArguments().Count() > 0)
{
temp.GetTypeInfo().GetGenericArguments();
var innerttype = temp.GetGenericArguments()[0].FullName;
}
Currently the above code (which is not complete but just an extract from actual code) return system.object as fullname instead of Dictionary.
Any suggestions to solve this are welcome.
If you declare your dictionary to be of type <string, object> and and only ever insert objects inside it and not something higher up in the graph, you'll only ever get object typed objects out of it.
If you're storing all kinds of things in there and need to get their concrete type so you can interact with them, try to make them all conform to an interface first. Then, put the interface type in there replacing "object." If that doesn't work you can use generics. However, you'll still need to know the type ahead of time in order to be able to interact with it.
If you really have no idea what's in there and want to dig into it dynamically, that's precisely what Reflection was built for. You could also look into the dynamic type.
I have a predefined data format, which requires me to have an object like this:
settings:{
settingA:'someValueFromSql',
settingB:'someValueFromAD'
settingC:'someValueFromConfigFile',
settingD:'someValueFromReflection',
settingE:42,
...
}
This settings object is in fact a huge mess of data stitched together from many different sources, but this is how the data is expected by the frontend. I'd like to put the "get/process all data from one source" in a function each, and tape the object together in the end.
So I would have one object
sqlSettings:{
settingA:'someValueFromSql',
settingG:'someOtherValueFromSql',
...
}
returned by function a, and an object
adSettings:{
settingB:'someValueFromAD',
settingV:'someOtherValueFromAD',
...
}
returned by function b, and an object
settings includes adSettings, sqlSettings
where, with at most two simple steps, I can "join together" both objects into a flat third object.
Is this possible with fixed-size objects, without using a generic Dictionary, or am I barking up the wrong tree?
(I'm sure this question was already asked on SO, but I guess I don't find the right words)
It's not possible with a "normal" object, but you can do it with an ExpandoObject and the dynamic keyword. But you need at least .net 4.0
dynamic settings = new ExpandoObject();
//If you try to assign a property that doesn't exist, it is added to the object.
settings.SettingA="sfgd"
Anyway I discourage using this approach. why you don't want to use a IDictionary<string, object> or better a IDictionary<string, MyCustomSettingObject>
--------------------UPDATE---------------------
if the only thing that stops you from using a dictionary is the serialization you can implement the IXmlSerializable Interface and ouput the xml you like:
Proper way to implement IXmlSerializable?
If those partial setting objects have fixed size (meaning fixed number of properties), then you can definitely create a flat object with e.g. only properties to fit all the values in. Then to ease your work, you can try to use Automapper to map the partial objects to the "grouped" object.
http://automapper.codeplex.com/
Otherwise, you will have to stick with the dictionary.
I have a service that is returning a custom object called "UserSettings" In my application I want to add more properties to the "UserSettings" object so I created a new object called "MyUserSettings" that inherits from "UserSettings" now I want to populate my new object with the existing data held in "UserSettings" and the new data I have for my new properties. I do not want to have to map each property one by one to the same property in the new object like this..
_MyUserSettings.Name=_UserSettings.Name;
Is there a way or better approach to what I am doing to populate ALL the properties of the existing object into my new object in one shot??
Yes, you can use Copy Constructor pattern. It would give you an other benefit - you do not need public property setters so object becomes immutable.
public MyUserSettings(UserSettings baseSettings)
{
// TODO: set all properties
}
Unfortunately this is the only way, however, the specific mechanism can change. There are a numerous ways (not listing them all):
Copy constructor, that takes an item and does this manual copying of fields across.
Use reflection to have a more generic mechanism of achieving the same.
Use something like AutoMapper.
They all boil down to pretty much doing the same thing.
If the UserSettings is actually a MyUserSettings then you can simply cast it:
var mySettings = (MyUserSettings)settings;
However, this will fail if UserSettings is really UserSettings.
I have an asp:ImageButton with OnClick="Btn_OnClick".
In Btn_OnClick I have this line:
DataTable dtTable = (DataTable)Session["someSessionKey"]
and dtTable is altered in the function.
I've noticed that if the button's clicked more than once, the dtTable I take from the session contains the altered table, probably meaning dtTable is not a copy but a reference of the session variable.
How can I alter a copy of Session["someSessionKey"], and not the actual value?
Thanks!
DataTable dtTable = ((DataTable)Session["someSessionKey"]).Copy();
If the object in the Session implements ICloneable, you can use var myCopy = mySessionObject.Clone();. You would then have to read the documentation of the object to see what it exactly does.
This is because there is no generic solution to cloning. Mostly, objects have other non-scalar objects as properties, so it always depends on the scenario if you need to clone those child objects too.
When you author your own class, you can always call the protected MemberwiseClone() method that is defined in System.Object to get a flat clone. You can then choose if you want to add some additional cloning logic and if you want to make it available for callers outside.
If the object in the Session is a List<T> or an IEnumerable<T>, you can do var myCopiedList = new List<T>(myListInSession);. Keep in mind that the individual objects in that list are not cloned in that case. You'd have to foreach through them and clone each object manually. It's similar with the DataTable. You might need to manually create a new instance and copy the content over.
To manually clone an object that doesn't support any public method to do so, you'd have to create a new instance of it. Then you'd assign every property from the original object to the cloned object manually. That can be not only tedious, often it also won't work because there are protected members that you can't access easily.
Finally, you can resort to reflection or other tricks to try to clone an object. A quick google search gave me that result: C# Object clone wars.