We Keep Coding

Implementing Strategy pattern instead of several if statements

I have this method with lot of if statements, in which I'm filtering SharePoint list based on employee position.The result is query string which is passed as parameter to another method QuerySPList.
public List<Phone> GetListOfPhones(Employee emp)
{
List<Phone> records = new List<Phone>();
string query = string.Empty;
if (emp.Positions.Count == 1 && emp.Positions[0] == "Regular")
{
query = "";// some querystring
}
if (emp.Positions.Count == 1 && emp.Positions[0] == "OfficeDirector")
{
query = "";// some querystring
}
if (emp.Positions.Count == 1 && emp.Positions[0] == "Admin")
{
query = "";// some querystring
}
if (emp.Positions.Count == 2 && emp.Positions.Contains("Regular") && emp.Positions.Contains("OfficeDirector"))
{
query = "";// some querystring
}
var rawItems = QuerySPList(query);
foreach (SPListItem item in rawItems)
{
//business logic
}
return records;
}}
I've read that with implementing strategy pattern we can avoid messy code with lot of if's , however , I'm new to developing , and design patterns , so I need little help with this one,so if someone can guide me what should I do and give me advice , feel free to answer my question.I have idea , but I think that I'm going in the wrong direction.
Idea is to create interface IRoleHandler and than implement it to 3 classes , for example RoleAdmin ,RoleRegular,RoleOfficeDirector.Something like this :
public interface IRoleHandler<T>
{
string handleRole(T obj);
}
public class RoleAdmin:IRoleHandler<Employee>
{
public string handleRole(Employee emp)
{
if (emp.Positions.Count == 1 && emp.Positions[0] == "Admin")
{
//return some string query
}
}
}
Then idea is to create dictionary,something like this :
Dictionary<string, IRoleHandler<Employee>> strategyHandlers = new Dictionary<string, IRoleHandler<Employee>>();
strategyHandlers.Add("Admin", new RoleAdmin());
strategyHandlers.Add("Regular", new RoleRegularUser());

Firstly, I think you need to be less concerned with the 'internal structure' of the Strategy Pattern and more concerned with its design goal/use.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategy_pattern
the strategy pattern (also known as the policy pattern) is a software design pattern that enables an algorithm's behavior to be selected at runtime. The strategy pattern
defines a family of algorithms,
encapsulates each algorithm, and
makes the algorithms interchangeable within that family.
To me, it looks like you are actually intending to "create" a string, based on some input value.
Therefore you would likely want to use one of the Creational patterns
My suggestion would be likely be Factory Pattern, or possibly Builder pattern. (Both linked in the creational patterns link)
private string BuildQueryByEmployee(Employee emp) {
// create your builder
EmployeeQueryBuilder mBuilder = new EmployeeQueryBuilder ();
// add # of positions
mBuilder.addPositionCount(emp.Positions.Count);
// add each position
for (int i =0 ; i < emp.Positions.Count; i++ ){
mBuilder.addPosition(emp.Positions[i]);
}
// 'build' your query.
// and return the query as a string.
return mBuilder.buildQuery();
}
Then inside your EmployeeQueryBuilder class, you handle the complexity of how to build your query based on the # of positions, and what they are.
Secondly, Here are some links that might be of use to you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_design_pattern (General disc. of Patterns)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_Patterns (The "Gang of Four" book, essentially the first book on design patterns, and worth reading a few times, and writing each pattern out by hand a few times until you are comfortable with them, this alone will boost your coding ability by 2~3x if you haven't used patterns before, The examples in this book are somewhat out of date, since its motivating factor is writing a Text Editor... but still a 'classic', well worth knowing)
http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~schmidt/POSA/POSA2/ (One of the first books on patterns that have to deal with Concurrency) (POSA = Pattern Oriented Software Architecture) (might be overkill for now, but 'good to know about' in general)

I don't think strategy pattern is what you want. I would just refactor your code to extract the ifs to another method.
public List<Phone> GetListOfPhones(Employee emp)
{
List<Phone> records = new List<Phone>();
string query = BuildQueryByEmployeePosition(emp);
var rawItems = QuerySPList(query);
foreach (SPListItem item in rawItems)
{
//business logic
}
return records;
}
private string BuildQueryByEmployeePosition(Employee emp)
{
if (emp.Positions.Count == 1 && emp.Positions[0] == "Regular")
return "";// some querystring
if (emp.Positions.Count == 1 && emp.Positions[0] == "OfficeDirector")
return "";// some querystring
if (emp.Positions.Count == 1 && emp.Positions[0] == "Admin")
return "";// some querystring
if (emp.Positions.Count == 2 && emp.Positions.Contains("Regular") && emp.Positions.Contains("OfficeDirector"))
return "";// some querystring
return ""; // some default query
}
Here is a link to a great explanation of strategy pattern
(with a real example of a sort algorithm).
It's great to see that you are new to programming and is studying patterns, but
beware: using them when they are not needed is an anti-pattern.

In my opition it is better you use a kind of STATE PATTERN with COMPOSITE.
Example:
public abstract class Position
{
public abstract List<int> ListOfPhones();
}
public class Employer
{
public virtual IList<Position> CurrentPositions { get; set; }
}
public class Manager : Employer
{
public Manager(List<Position> positions)
{
this.CurrentPositions = positions;
}
public IEnumerable<int> GetNumbers()
{
foreach (Position position in this.CurrentPositions)
foreach (var number in position.ListOfPhones())
yield return number;
}
}
Code above is incomplete, just for you get the ideia.

I agree with mawalker, you don't need strategy pattern as you have the same behavior for all cases. What do you need is some kind of creational patterns. I would refactor your code using Builder and Chain of Responsibility patterns.
1) Implement base class:
public abstract class EmployeeHandler
{
private readonly EmployeeHandler _nextHandler;
protected EmployeeHandler(EmployeeHandler nextHandler)
{
_nextHandler = nextHandler;
}
public string BuildQuery(Employee emp)
{
if (CanHandle(emp))
{
return GetQuery(emp);
}
if (_nextHandler == null)
{
return string.Empty;
}
return _nextHandler.BuildQuery(emp);
}
protected abstract string GetQuery(Employee emp);
protected abstract bool CanHandle(Employee emp);
}
2) Define concrete implementations:
public class RegularEmployeeHandler : EmployeeHandler
{
public RegularEmployeeHandler(EmployeeHandler nextHandler) : base(nextHandler) {
}
protected override bool CanHandle(Employee emp)
{
return emp.Positions.Count == 1 && emp.Positions[0] == "Regular";
}
protected override string GetQuery(Employee emp)
{
return "some regular query";
}
}
public class OfficeDirectorEmployeeHandler : EmployeeHandler
{
public OfficeDirectorEmployeeHandler(EmployeeHandler nextHandler) : base(nextHandler) {
}
protected override bool CanHandle(Employee emp)
{
return emp.Positions.Count == 1 && emp.Positions[0] == "OfficeDirector";
}
protected override string GetQuery(Employee emp)
{
return "some office director query";
}
}
public class AdminEmployeeHandler : EmployeeHandler
{
public AdminEmployeeHandler(EmployeeHandler nextHandler) : base(nextHandler) {
}
protected override bool CanHandle(Employee emp)
{
return emp.Positions.Count == 1 && emp.Positions[0] == "Admin";
}
protected override string GetQuery(Employee emp)
{
return "some admin query";
}
}
public class RegularAndOfficeDirectorEmployeeHandler : EmployeeHandler
{
public RegularAndOfficeDirectorEmployeeHandler(EmployeeHandler nextHandler) : base(nextHandler) {
}
protected override string GetQuery(Employee emp)
{
return "some regular and director query";
}
protected override bool CanHandle(Employee emp)
{
return emp.Positions.Count == 2 && emp.Positions.Contains("Regular") && emp.Positions.Contains("OfficeDirector");
}
}
3) And finally you main class will changed like this:
public class YouMainClass
{
private readonly EmployeeHandler _firstHandler;
public YouMainClass()
{
var regularHandler = new RegularEmployeeHandler(null);
var officeDirectorHandler = new OfficeDirectorEmployeeHandler(regularHandler);
var adminHandler = new AdminEmployeeHandler(officeDirectorHandler);
_firstHandler = new RegularAndOfficeDirectorEmployeeHandler(adminHandler);
}
public List<Phone> GetListOfPhones(Employee emp, IQueryBuilder queryBuilder)
{
List<Phone> records = new List<Phone>();
string query = _firstHandler.BuildQuery(emp);
var rawItems = QuerySPList(query);
foreach (SPListItem item in rawItems)
{
//business logic
}
return records;
}
}

Entity Framework not saving modified children

Frustrating, this. Here's a pair of related objects, as generated by database-first Entity Framework:
public partial class DevelopmentType
{
public DevelopmentType()
{
this.DefaultCharges = new HashSet<DefaultCharge>();
}
public System.Guid RowId { get; set; }
public string Type { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<DefaultCharge> DefaultCharges { get; set; }
}
public partial class DefaultCharge
{
public System.Guid RowId { get; set; }
public decimal ChargeableRate { get; set; }
public Nullable<System.Guid> DevelopmentType_RowId { get; set; }
public virtual DevelopmentType DevelopmentType { get; set; }
}
Here's the code that I'm calling to save a DevelopmentType - it involves automapper since we differentiate entity objects from DTOs:
public void SaveDevelopmentType(DevelopmentType_dto dt)
{
Entities.DevelopmentType mappedDevType = Mapper.Map<DevelopmentType_dto, Entities.DevelopmentType>(dt);
_Context.Entry(mappedDevType).State = System.Data.EntityState.Modified;
_Context.DevelopmentTypes.Attach(mappedDevType);
_Context.SaveChanges();
}
In my user interface, the most common operation will be for a user to look at a list of DevelopmentTypes and update their DefaultCharge. So when I test this using the above code, it runs without error, but nothing actually changes.
If I pause in the debugger it's clear that the changed DefaultCharge is being passed into the function, and that it's attached to the DevelopmentType to be saved.
Stepping through it, if I change the value manually inside visual studio, it does save the updated value. Which is just even more confusing.
Monitoring the database with SQL Server Profiler reveals that update commands are issued only for the parent object and not for any attached objects.
I have other similar code elsewhere that functions as expected. What am I doing wrong here?
EDIT:
I have discovered that if you do this prior to the call to SaveDevelopmentType:
using (TransactionScope scope = new TransactionScope())
{
dt.Type = "Test1";
dt.DefaultCharges.First().ChargeableRate = 99;
_CILRepository.SaveDevelopmentType(dt);
scope.Complete();
}
The change to Type saves, but the change to ChargeableRate does not. I don't think it helps, massively, but thought I'd add it.

The problem is, that EF is not aware of the changed DefaultCharges.
By setting the State of the DevelopmentType to EntityState.Modified, EF only knows that the object DevelopmentType has been changed. However, this means that EF will only update DevelopmentType but not it's navigation properties.
A workaround - which isn't best practice - would be to iterate over all DefaultCharge of the current DevelopmentType and set the entity state to EntityState.Modified.
Additionally I would recommend to attach the entity to the context first, and change the state afterwards.
EDIT after comment
As you are using DTOs I suppose you are transfering these objects either through different layers or different machines.
In this case I would recommend to use self tracking entities, because it is not possible to share one context. These entities additionally holds their current state (ie. new, updated, deleted etc). There are many tutorials on the net about self tracking entities.
e.g. MSDN - Working with Self-Tracking Entities

As far as I know EF can save child entities only if the parent object was retrieved with the same Context that is trying to save it. That is attaching an object that was retrieved by one context to another context, will allow you to save changes to parent objects but not children. This was the result of a on old search based on which we switched to NHibernate. If memory serves correctly I was able to find a link where EF team member(s) confirmed this and that there WAS no plan to change this behavior. Unfortunately all links related to that search have been erased from my PC since.
As I am not aware of how you are retrieving the objects in your case, I am not sure this is relevant to your case, but put it out there just in case it helps.
Here is a link on attaching detached objects to a context.
http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/576330/Attaching-detached-POCO-to-EF-DbContext-simple-and

Context.Entry() already "Attaches" the Entity internally in order to have the context change its EntityState.
By calling Attach() you're changing the EntityState back to Unchanged. Try to comment out this line.

The Graphdiff library was a great help for me to handle all of these complexities.
You only need to set up the navigation properties that you wish to insert/update/delete (using fluent syntax) and Graphdiff will take care of it
Note: It seems to be that the project is not updated anymore but i'm using it since more than a year and is quite stable

This is not a workaround for every case, but I did discover that you can get around this by updating foreign keys on an object instead of updating navigation property objects.
For example... instead of:
myObject.myProperty = anotherPropertyObject;
Try this:
myObject.myPropertyID = anotherPropertyObject.ID;
Make sure the object is flagged as modified in EF's mind (as mentioned in other posts) and then call your save method.
Worked for me at least! It'll be a no-go when working with nested properties, but perhaps you can break your contexts up into smaller chunks and work over objects in multiple parts to avoid context bloat.
Good luck! :)

If I understand the question correctly, you have problem updating child fields. I had problems with child collection fields. I tried this and it worked for me.
You should update all child collections after attaching the object to the database context change the modified state of the parent object and save changes to the context.
Database.Products.Attach(argProduct);
argProduct.Categories = Database.Categories.Where(x => ListCategories.Contains(x.CategoryId)).ToList();
Database.Entry(argProduct).State = EntityState.Modified;
Database.SaveChanges();

I created a helper method to solve this problem.
Consider this:
public abstract class BaseEntity
{
/// <summary>
/// The unique identifier for this BaseEntity.
/// </summary>
[Key]
public Guid Id { get; set; }
}
public class BaseEntityComparer : IEqualityComparer<BaseEntity>
{
public bool Equals(BaseEntity left, BaseEntity right)
{
if (ReferenceEquals(null, right)) { return false; }
return ReferenceEquals(left, right) || left.Id.Equals(right.Id);
}
public int GetHashCode(BaseEntity obj)
{
return obj.Id.GetHashCode();
}
}
public class Event : BaseEntity
{
[Required(AllowEmptyStrings = false)]
[StringLength(256)]
public string Name { get; set; }
public HashSet<Manager> Managers { get; set; }
}
public class Manager : BaseEntity
{
[Required(AllowEmptyStrings = false)]
[StringLength(256)]
public string Name { get; set; }
public Event Event{ get; set; }
}
DbContext with the helper method:
public class MyDataContext : DbContext
{
public MyDataContext() : base("ConnectionName") { }
//Tables
public DbSet<Event> Events { get; set; }
public DbSet<Manager> Managers { get; set; }
public async Task AddOrUpdate<T>(T entity, params string[] ignoreProperties) where T : BaseEntity
{
if (entity == null || Entry(entity).State == EntityState.Added || Entry(entity).State == EntityState.Modified) { return; }
var state = await Set<T>().AnyAsync(x => x.Id == entity.Id) ? EntityState.Modified : EntityState.Added;
Entry(entity).State = state;
var type = typeof(T);
RelationshipManager relationship;
var stateManager = ((IObjectContextAdapter)this).ObjectContext.ObjectStateManager;
if (stateManager.TryGetRelationshipManager(entity, out relationship))
{
foreach (var end in relationship.GetAllRelatedEnds())
{
var isForeignKey = end.GetType().GetProperty("IsForeignKey", BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.NonPublic)?.GetValue(end) as bool?;
var navigationProperty = end.GetType().GetProperty("NavigationProperty", BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.NonPublic)?.GetValue(end);
var propertyName = navigationProperty?.GetType().GetProperty("Identity", BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.NonPublic)?.GetValue(navigationProperty) as string;
if (string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(propertyName) || ignoreProperties.Contains(propertyName)) { continue; }
var property = type.GetProperty(propertyName);
if (property == null) { continue; }
if (end is IEnumerable) { await UpdateChildrenInternal(entity, property, isForeignKey == true); }
else { await AddOrUpdateInternal(entity, property, ignoreProperties); }
}
}
if (state == EntityState.Modified)
{
Entry(entity).OriginalValues.SetValues(await Entry(entity).GetDatabaseValuesAsync());
Entry(entity).State = GetChangedProperties(Entry(entity)).Any() ? state : EntityState.Unchanged;
}
}
private async Task AddOrUpdateInternal<T>(T entity, PropertyInfo property, params string[] ignoreProperties)
{
var method = typeof(EasementDataContext).GetMethod("AddOrUpdate");
var generic = method.MakeGenericMethod(property.PropertyType);
await (Task)generic.Invoke(this, new[] { property.GetValue(entity), ignoreProperties });
}
private async Task UpdateChildrenInternal<T>(T entity, PropertyInfo property, bool isForeignKey)
{
var type = typeof(T);
var method = isForeignKey ? typeof(EasementDataContext).GetMethod("UpdateForeignChildren") : typeof(EasementDataContext).GetMethod("UpdateChildren");
var objType = property.PropertyType.GetGenericArguments()[0];
var enumerable = typeof(IEnumerable<>).MakeGenericType(objType);
var param = Expression.Parameter(type, "x");
var body = Expression.Property(param, property);
var lambda = Expression.Lambda(Expression.Convert(body, enumerable), property.Name, new[] { param });
var generic = method.MakeGenericMethod(type, objType);
await (Task)generic.Invoke(this, new object[] { entity, lambda, null });
}
public async Task UpdateForeignChildren<T, TProperty>(T parent, Expression<Func<T, IEnumerable<TProperty>>> childSelector, IEqualityComparer<TProperty> comparer = null) where T : BaseEntity where TProperty : BaseEntity
{
var children = (childSelector.Invoke(parent) ?? Enumerable.Empty<TProperty>()).ToList();
foreach (var child in children) { await AddOrUpdate(child); }
var existingChildren = await Set<T>().Where(x => x.Id == parent.Id).SelectMany(childSelector).AsNoTracking().ToListAsync();
if (comparer == null) { comparer = new BaseEntityComparer(); }
foreach (var child in existingChildren.Except(children, comparer)) { Entry(child).State = EntityState.Deleted; }
}
public async Task UpdateChildren<T, TProperty>(T parent, Expression<Func<T, IEnumerable<TProperty>>> childSelector, IEqualityComparer<TProperty> comparer = null) where T : BaseEntity where TProperty : BaseEntity
{
var stateManager = ((IObjectContextAdapter)this).ObjectContext.ObjectStateManager;
var currentChildren = childSelector.Invoke(parent) ?? Enumerable.Empty<TProperty>();
var existingChildren = await Set<T>().Where(x => x.Id == parent.Id).SelectMany(childSelector).AsNoTracking().ToListAsync();
if (comparer == null) { comparer = new BaseEntityComparer(); }
var addedChildren = currentChildren.Except(existingChildren, comparer).AsEnumerable();
var deletedChildren = existingChildren.Except(currentChildren, comparer).AsEnumerable();
foreach (var child in currentChildren) { await AddOrUpdate(child); }
foreach (var child in addedChildren) { stateManager.ChangeRelationshipState(parent, child, childSelector.Name, EntityState.Added); }
foreach (var child in deletedChildren)
{
Entry(child).State = EntityState.Unchanged;
stateManager.ChangeRelationshipState(parent, child, childSelector.Name, EntityState.Deleted);
}
}
public static IEnumerable<string> GetChangedProperties(DbEntityEntry dbEntry)
{
var propertyNames = dbEntry.State == EntityState.Added ? dbEntry.CurrentValues.PropertyNames : dbEntry.OriginalValues.PropertyNames;
foreach (var propertyName in propertyNames)
{
if (IsValueChanged(dbEntry, propertyName))
{
yield return propertyName;
}
}
}
private static bool IsValueChanged(DbEntityEntry dbEntry, string propertyName)
{
return !Equals(OriginalValue(dbEntry, propertyName), CurrentValue(dbEntry, propertyName));
}
private static string OriginalValue(DbEntityEntry dbEntry, string propertyName)
{
string originalValue = null;
if (dbEntry.State == EntityState.Modified)
{
originalValue = dbEntry.OriginalValues.GetValue<object>(propertyName) == null
? null
: dbEntry.OriginalValues.GetValue<object>(propertyName).ToString();
}
return originalValue;
}
private static string CurrentValue(DbEntityEntry dbEntry, string propertyName)
{
string newValue;
try
{
newValue = dbEntry.CurrentValues.GetValue<object>(propertyName) == null
? null
: dbEntry.CurrentValues.GetValue<object>(propertyName).ToString();
}
catch (InvalidOperationException) // It will be invalid operation when its in deleted state. in that case, new value should be null
{
newValue = null;
}
return newValue;
}
}
Then I call it like this
// POST: Admin/Events/Edit/5
[HttpPost]
[ValidateAntiForgeryToken]
public async Task<ActionResult> Edit(Event #event)
{
if (!ModelState.IsValid) { return View(#event); }
await _db.AddOrUpdate(#event);
await _db.SaveChangesAsync();
return RedirectToAction("Index");
}

Where's the best place for validation... constructor or leave to client to call?

This is really a generic (and probably a more subjective too) question. I have some classes where I use an interface to define a standard approach to validating the object state. When I did this, I got to scratching my head... is it best to
1.) allow the constructor (or initializing method) to silently filter out the errant information automatically or...
2.) allow the client to instantiate the object however and let the client also call the interface's IsValid property or Validate() method before moving forward?
Basically one approach is silent but could be misleading in that the client may not be aware that certain pieces of information were filtered away due to it not meeting the validation criteria. The other approach then would be more straight forward, but also adds a step or two? What's typical here?
Okay, after a long day of trying to keep up with some other things, I finally did come up with an example. Please for me for it as it's not ideal and by no means something wonderful, but hopefully should serve well enough to get the point across. My current project is just too complicated to put something simple out for this, so I made something up... and trust me... totally made up.
Alright, the objects in the example are this:
Client: representing client-side code (Console App btw)
IValidationInfo: This is the actual interface I'm using in my current project. It allows me to create a validation framework for the "back-end" objects not necessarily intended for the Client to use since the business logic could be complicated enough. This also allowed me to separate validation code and call as-needed for the business logic.
OrderManager: This is an object the client-side code can use to manage their orders. It's client-friendly so-to-speak.
OrderSpecification: This is an object the client-side code can use to request an order. But if the business logic doesn't work out, an exception can be raised (or if necessary the order not added and exceptions ignored...) In my real-world example I actually have an object that's not quite so black-and-white as to which side of this fence it goes... thus my original question when I realized I could push validation request (calling IsValid or Validate()) to the cilent.
CustomerDescription: represents customers to which I've classified (pretending to have been read from a DB.
Product: Represents a particular product which is classified also.
OrderDescription: Represents the official order request.The business rule is that the Customer cannot order anything to which they've not been classified (I know.. that's not very real-world, but it gave me something to work with...)
Ok... I just realized I can't attach a file here, so here's the code. I apologize for it's lengthy appearance. That was the best I could do to create a client-friendly front-end and business logic back-end using my Validation interface:
public class Client
{
static OrderManager orderMgr = new OrderManager();
static void Main(string[] args)
{
//Request a new order
//Note: Only the OrderManager and OrderSpecification are used by the Client as to keep the
// Client from having to know and understand the framework beyond that point.
OrderSpecification orderSpec = new OrderSpecification("Customer1", new Product(IndustryCategory.FoodServices, "Vending Items"));
orderMgr.SubmitOrderRequest(orderSpec);
Console.WriteLine("The OrderManager has {0} items for {1} customers.", orderMgr.ProductCount, orderMgr.CustomerCount);
//Now add a second item proving that the business logic to add for an existing customer works
Console.WriteLine("Adding another valid item for the same customer.");
orderSpec = new OrderSpecification("Customer1", new Product(IndustryCategory.FoodServices, "Sodas"));
orderMgr.SubmitOrderRequest(orderSpec);
Console.WriteLine("The OrderManager now has {0} items for {1} customers.", orderMgr.ProductCount, orderMgr.CustomerCount);
Console.WriteLine("Adding a new valid order for a new customer.");
orderSpec = new OrderSpecification("Customer2", new Product(IndustryCategory.Residential, "Magazines"));
orderMgr.SubmitOrderRequest(orderSpec);
Console.WriteLine("The OrderManager now has {0} items for {1} customers.", orderMgr.ProductCount, orderMgr.CustomerCount);
Console.WriteLine("Adding a invalid one will not work because the customer is not set up to receive these kinds of items. Should get an exception with message...");
try
{
orderSpec = new OrderSpecification("Customer3", new Product(IndustryCategory.Residential, "Magazines"));
orderMgr.SubmitOrderRequest(orderSpec);
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
Console.WriteLine(ex.Message);
}
Console.ReadLine();
}
}
public interface IValidationInfo
{
string[] ValidationItems { get; }
bool IsValid { get; }
void Validate();
List<string> GetValidationErrors();
string GetValidationError(string itemName);
}
public class OrderManager
{
private List<OrderDescription> _orders = new List<OrderDescription>();
public List<OrderDescription> Orders
{
get { return new List<OrderDescription>(_orders); }
private set { _orders = value; }
}
public int ProductCount
{
get
{
int itemCount = 0;
this.Orders.ForEach(o => itemCount += o.Products.Count);
return itemCount;
}
}
public int CustomerCount
{
get
{
//since there's only one customer per order, just return the number of orders
return this.Orders.Count;
}
}
public void SubmitOrderRequest(OrderSpecification orderSpec)
{
if (orderSpec.IsValid)
{
List<OrderDescription> orders = this.Orders;
//Since the particular customer may already have an order, we might as well add to an existing
OrderDescription existingOrder = orders.FirstOrDefault(o => string.Compare(orderSpec.Order.Customer.Name, o.Customer.Name, true) == 0) as OrderDescription;
if (existingOrder != null)
{
List<Product> existingProducts = orderSpec.Order.Products;
orderSpec.Order.Products.ForEach(p => existingOrder.AddProduct(p));
}
else
{
orders.Add(orderSpec.Order);
}
this.Orders = orders;
}
else
orderSpec.Validate(); //Let the OrderSpecification pass the business logic validation down the chain
}
}
public enum IndustryCategory
{
Residential,
Textile,
FoodServices,
Something
}
public class OrderSpecification : IValidationInfo
{
public OrderDescription Order { get; private set; }
public OrderSpecification(string customerName, Product product)
{
//Should use a method in the class to search and retrieve Customer... pretending here
CustomerDescription customer = null;
switch (customerName)
{
case "Customer1":
customer = new CustomerDescription() { Name = customerName, Category = IndustryCategory.FoodServices };
break;
case "Customer2":
customer = new CustomerDescription() { Name = customerName, Category = IndustryCategory.Residential };
break;
case "Customer3":
customer = new CustomerDescription() { Name = customerName, Category = IndustryCategory.Textile };
break;
}
//Create an OrderDescription to potentially represent the order... valid or not since this is
//a specification being used to request the order
this.Order = new OrderDescription(new List<Product>() { product }, customer);
}
#region IValidationInfo Members
private readonly string[] _validationItems =
{
"OrderDescription"
};
public string[] ValidationItems
{
get { return _validationItems; }
}
public bool IsValid
{
get
{
List<string> validationErrors = GetValidationErrors();
if (validationErrors != null && validationErrors.Count > 0)
return false;
else
return true;
}
}
public void Validate()
{
List<string> errorMessages = GetValidationErrors();
if (errorMessages != null && errorMessages.Count > 0)
{
StringBuilder errorMessageReported = new StringBuilder();
errorMessages.ForEach(em => errorMessageReported.AppendLine(em));
throw new Exception(errorMessageReported.ToString());
}
}
public List<string> GetValidationErrors()
{
List<string> errorMessages = new List<string>();
foreach (string item in this.ValidationItems)
{
string errorMessage = GetValidationError(item);
if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(errorMessage))
errorMessages.Add(errorMessage);
}
return errorMessages;
}
public string GetValidationError(string itemName)
{
switch (itemName)
{
case "OrderDescription":
return ValidateOrderDescription();
default:
return "Invalid item name.";
}
}
#endregion
private string ValidateOrderDescription()
{
string errorMessage = string.Empty;
if (this.Order == null)
errorMessage = "Order was not instantiated.";
else
{
if (!this.Order.IsValid)
{
List<string> orderErrors = this.Order.GetValidationErrors();
orderErrors.ForEach(ce => errorMessage += "\n" + ce);
}
}
return errorMessage;
}
}
public class CustomerDescription : IValidationInfo
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Street { get; set; }
public string City { get; set; }
public string State { get; set; }
public int ZipCode { get; set; }
public IndustryCategory Category { get; set; }
#region IValidationInfo Members
private readonly string[] _validationItems =
{
"Name",
"Street",
"City",
"State",
"ZipCode",
"Category"
};
public string[] ValidationItems
{
get { return _validationItems; }
}
public bool IsValid
{
get
{
List<string> validationErrors = GetValidationErrors();
if (validationErrors != null && validationErrors.Count > 0)
return false;
else
return true;
}
}
public void Validate()
{
List<string> errorMessages = GetValidationErrors();
if (errorMessages != null && errorMessages.Count > 0)
{
StringBuilder errorMessageReported = new StringBuilder();
errorMessages.ForEach(em => errorMessageReported.AppendLine(em));
throw new Exception(errorMessageReported.ToString());
}
}
public List<string> GetValidationErrors()
{
List<string> errorMessages = new List<string>();
foreach (string item in this.ValidationItems)
{
string errorMessage = GetValidationError(item);
if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(errorMessage))
errorMessages.Add(errorMessage);
}
return errorMessages;
}
public string GetValidationError(string itemName)
{
//Validation methods should be called here... pretending nothings wrong for sake of discussion & simplicity
switch (itemName)
{
case "Name":
return string.Empty;
case "Street":
return string.Empty;
case "City":
return string.Empty;
case "State":
return string.Empty;
case "ZipCode":
return string.Empty;
case "Category":
return string.Empty;
default:
return "Invalid item name.";
}
}
#endregion
}
public class Product
{
public IndustryCategory Category { get; private set; }
public string Description { get; private set; }
public Product(IndustryCategory category, string description)
{
this.Category = category;
this.Description = description;
}
}
public class OrderDescription : IValidationInfo
{
public CustomerDescription Customer { get; private set; }
private List<Product> _products = new List<Product>();
public List<Product> Products
{
get { return new List<Product>(_products); }
private set { _products = value; }
}
public OrderDescription(List<Product> products, CustomerDescription customer)
{
this.Products = products;
this.Customer = customer;
}
public void PlaceOrder()
{
//If order valid, place
if (this.IsValid)
{
//Do stuff to place order
}
else
Validate(); //cause the exceptions to be raised with the validate because business rules were broken
}
public void AddProduct(Product product)
{
List<Product> productsToEvaluate = this.Products;
//some special read, validation, quantity check, pre-existing, etc here
// doing other stuff...
productsToEvaluate.Add(product);
this.Products = productsToEvaluate;
}
#region IValidationInfo Members
private readonly string[] _validationItems =
{
"Customer",
"Products"
};
public string[] ValidationItems
{
get { return _validationItems; }
}
public bool IsValid
{
get
{
List<string> validationErrors = GetValidationErrors();
if (validationErrors != null && validationErrors.Count > 0)
return false;
else
return true;
}
}
public void Validate()
{
List<string> errorMessages = GetValidationErrors();
if (errorMessages != null && errorMessages.Count > 0)
{
StringBuilder errorMessageReported = new StringBuilder();
errorMessages.ForEach(em => errorMessageReported.AppendLine(em));
throw new Exception(errorMessageReported.ToString());
}
}
public List<string> GetValidationErrors()
{
List<string> errorMessages = new List<string>();
foreach (string item in this.ValidationItems)
{
string errorMessage = GetValidationError(item);
if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(errorMessage))
errorMessages.Add(errorMessage);
}
return errorMessages;
}
public string GetValidationError(string itemName)
{
switch (itemName)
{
case "Customer":
return ValidateCustomer();
case "Products":
return ValidateProducts();
default:
return "Invalid item name.";
}
}
#endregion
#region Validation Methods
private string ValidateCustomer()
{
string errorMessage = string.Empty;
if (this.Customer == null)
errorMessage = "CustomerDescription is missing a valid value.";
else
{
if (!this.Customer.IsValid)
{
List<string> customerErrors = this.Customer.GetValidationErrors();
customerErrors.ForEach(ce => errorMessage += "\n" + ce);
}
}
return errorMessage;
}
private string ValidateProducts()
{
string errorMessage = string.Empty;
if (this.Products == null || this.Products.Count <= 0)
errorMessage = "Invalid Order. Missing Products.";
else
{
foreach (Product product in this.Products)
{
if (product.Category != Customer.Category)
{
errorMessage += string.Format("\nThe Product, {0}, category does not match the required Customer category for {1}", product.Description, Customer.Name);
}
}
}
return errorMessage;
}
#endregion
}

Any reason you wouldn't want the constructor to noisily throw an exception if the information is valid? It's best to avoid ever creating an object in an invalid state, in my experience.

It's completely depends on the client. There's a trade-off as you already mentioned. By default approach number 1 is my favorite. Creating smart classes with good encapsulation and hiding details from client. The level of smartness depends who is going to use the object. If client is business aware you can reveal details according to the level of this awareness. This is a dichotomy and should not be treated as black or white.

Well if I correctly understood, there are basically two question - whether you should fail right away or later and whether you should omit/assume certain information.
1) I always prefer failing as soon as possible - good example is failing at compile time vs failing at run time - you always want to fail at compile time. So if something is wrong with the state of some object, as Jon said - throw exception right away as loudly as you can and deal with it - do not introduce additional complexity down the road as you'll be heading for if/elseif/elseif/elseif/else mumbo jumbo.
2) When it comes to user input, if you are in position to simply filter out errors automatically - just do it. For example, I almost never ask users for country - if I really need it, I automatically detect it from IP and display it in the form. It's way easier if user just needs to confirm/change the data - and I don't need to deal with null situation.
Now, in case we are talking about the data generated by code during some processing - for me situation is drastically different - I always want to know an much as possible (for easier debugging down the road) and ideally you never should destroy any piece of information.
To wrap up, in your case I would recommend that you keep IsValid as simple yes/no (not yes/no/maybe/kindaok/etc). If you can fix some problems automatically - do it, but consider that they keep object in IsValid yes. For everything else, you throw exception and go to IsValid=no.

How to get current property name via reflection?

I would like to get property name when I'm in it via reflection. Is it possible?
I have code like this:
public CarType Car
{
get { return (Wheel) this["Wheel"];}
set { this["Wheel"] = value; }
}
And because I need more properties like this I would like to do something like this:
public CarType Car
{
get { return (Wheel) this[GetThisPropertyName()];}
set { this[GetThisPropertyName()] = value; }
}

Since properties are really just methods you can do this and clean up the get_ returned:
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Program p = new Program();
var x = p.Something;
Console.ReadLine();
}
public string Something
{
get
{
return MethodBase.GetCurrentMethod().Name;
}
}
}
If you profile the performance you should find MethodBase.GetCurrentMethod() is miles faster than StackFrame. In .NET 1.1 you will also have issues with StackFrame in release mode (from memory I think I found it was 3x faster).
That said I'm sure the performance issue won't cause too much of a problem- though an interesting discussion on StackFrame slowness can be found here.
I guess another option if you were concerned about performance would be to create a Visual Studio Intellisense Code Snippet that creates the property for you and also creates a string that corresponds to the property name.

Slightly confusing example you presented, unless I just don't get it.
From C# 6.0 you can use the nameof operator.
public CarType MyProperty
{
get { return (CarType)this[nameof(MyProperty)]};
set { this[nameof(MyProperty)] = value]};
}
If you have a method that handles your getter/setter anyway, you can use the C# 4.5 CallerMemberName attribute, in this case you don't even need to repeat the name.
public CarType MyProperty
{
get { return Get<CarType>(); }
set { Set(value); }
}
public T Get<T>([CallerMemberName]string name = null)
{
return (T)this[name];
}
public void Set<T>(T value, [CallerMemberName]string name = null)
{
this[name] = value;
}

I'd like to know more about the context in which you need it since it seems to me that you should already know what property you are working with in the property accessor. If you must, though, you could probably use MethodBase.GetCurrentMethod().Name and remove anything after get_/set_.
Update:
Based on your changes, I would say that you should use inheritance rather than reflection. I don't know what data is in your dictionary, but it seems to me that you really want to have different Car classes, say Sedan, Roadster, Buggy, StationWagon, not keep the type in a local variable. Then you would have implementations of methods that do the proper thing for that type of Car. Instead of finding out what kind of car you have, then doing something, you then simply call the appropriate method and the Car object does the right thing based on what type it is.
public interface ICar
{
void Drive( decimal velocity, Orientation orientation );
void Shift( int gear );
...
}
public abstract class Car : ICar
{
public virtual void Drive( decimal velocity, Orientation orientation )
{
...some default implementation...
}
public abstract void Shift( int gear );
...
}
public class AutomaticTransmission : Car
{
public override void Shift( int gear )
{
...some specific implementation...
}
}
public class ManualTransmission : Car
{
public override void Shift( int gear )
{
...some specific implementation...
}
}

Use MethodBase.GetCurrentMethod() instead!
Reflection is used to do work with types that can't be done at compile time. Getting the name of the property accessor you're in can be decided at compile time so you probably shouldn't use reflection for it.
You get use the accessor method's name from the call stack using System.Diagnostics.StackTrace though.
string GetPropertyName()
{
StackTrace callStackTrace = new StackTrace();
StackFrame propertyFrame = callStackTrace.GetFrame(1); // 1: below GetPropertyName frame
string properyAccessorName = propertyFrame.GetMethod().Name;
return properyAccessorName.Replace("get_","").Replace("set_","");
}

FWIW I implemented a system like this:
[CrmAttribute("firstname")]
public string FirstName
{
get { return GetPropValue<string>(MethodBase.GetCurrentMethod().Name); }
set { SetPropValue(MethodBase.GetCurrentMethod().Name, value); }
}
// this is in a base class, skipped that bit for clairty
public T GetPropValue<T>(string propName)
{
propName = propName.Replace("get_", "").Replace("set_", "");
string attributeName = GetCrmAttributeName(propName);
return GetAttributeValue<T>(attributeName);
}
public void SetPropValue(string propName, object value)
{
propName = propName.Replace("get_", "").Replace("set_", "");
string attributeName = GetCrmAttributeName(propName);
SetAttributeValue(attributeName, value);
}
private static Dictionary<string, string> PropToAttributeMap = new Dictionary<string, string>();
private string GetCrmAttributeName(string propertyName)
{
// keyName for our propertyName to (static) CrmAttributeName cache
string keyName = this.GetType().Name + propertyName;
// have we already done this mapping?
if (!PropToAttributeMap.ContainsKey(keyName))
{
Type t = this.GetType();
PropertyInfo info = t.GetProperty(propertyName);
if (info == null)
{
throw new Exception("Cannot find a propety called " + propertyName);
}
object[] attrs = info.GetCustomAttributes(false);
foreach (object o in attrs)
{
CrmAttributeAttribute attr = o as CrmAttributeAttribute ;
if (attr != null)
{
// found it. Save the mapping for next time.
PropToAttributeMap[keyName] = attr.AttributeName;
return attr.AttributeName;
}
}
throw new Exception("Missing MemberOf attribute for " + info.Name + "." + propertyName + ". Could not auto-access value");
}
// return the existing mapping
string result = PropToAttributeMap[keyName];
return result;
}
There's also a custom attribute class called CrmAttributeAttribute.
I'd strongly recommend against using GetStackFrame() as part of your solution, my original version of the solution was originally the much neater:
return GetPropValue<string>();
But it was 600x slower than the version above.

Solution # 1
var a = nameof(SampleMethod); //a == SampleMethod
var b = nameof(SampleVariable); //b == SampleVariable
var c = nameof(SampleProperty); //c == SampleProperty
Solution # 2
MethodBase.GetCurrentMethod().Name; // Name of method in which you call the code
MethodBase.GetCurrentMethod().Name.Replace("set_", "").Replace("get_", ""); // current Property
Solution # 3
from StackTrace:
public static class Props
{
public static string CurrPropName =>
(new StackTrace()).GetFrame(1).GetMethod().Name.Replace("set_", "").Replace("get_", "");
public static string CurrMethodName =>
(new StackTrace()).GetFrame(1).GetMethod().Name;
}
you just need to call Props.CurrPropName or Props.CurrMethodName
Solution # 4
Solution for .NET 4.5+:
public static class Props
{
public static string GetCallerName([System.Runtime.CompilerServices.CallerMemberName] String propertyName = "")
{
return propertyName;
}
}
usage: Props.GetCallerName();

Yes, it is!
string test = "test string";
Type type = test.GetType();
PropertyInfo[] propInfos = type.GetProperties();
for (int i = 0; i < propInfos.Length; i++)
{
PropertyInfo pi = (PropertyInfo)propInfos.GetValue(i);
string propName = pi.Name;
}

Try using System.Diagnostics.StackTrace to reflect on the call stack. The property should be somewhere in the call stack (probably at the top if you're calling it directly from the property's code).

Replace a collection item using Linq

How do I find and replace a property using Linq in this specific scenario below:
public interface IPropertyBag { }
public class PropertyBag : IPropertyBag
{
public Property[] Properties { get; set; }
public Property this[string name]
{
get { return Properties.Where((e) => e.Name == name).Single(); }
//TODO: Just copying values... Find out how to find the index and replace the value
set { Properties.Where((e) => e.Name == name).Single().Value = value.Value; }
}
}
Thanks for helping out in advance.

Do not use LINQ because it will not improve the code because LINQ is designed to query collection and not to modify them. I suggest the following.
// Just realized that Array.IndexOf() is a static method unlike
// List.IndexOf() that is an instance method.
Int32 index = Array.IndexOf(this.Properties, name);
if (index != -1)
{
this.Properties[index] = value;
}
else
{
throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException();
}
Why are Array.Sort() and Array.IndexOf() methods static?
Further I suggest not to use an array. Consider using IDictionary<String, Property>. This simplifies the code to the following.
this.Properties[name] = value;
Note that neither solution is thread safe.
An ad hoc LINQ solution - you see, you should not use it because the whole array will be replaced with a new one.
this.Properties = Enumerable.Union(
this.Properties.Where(p => p.Name != name),
Enumerable.Repeat(value, 1)).
ToArray();

[note: this answer was due to a misunderstanding of the question - see the comments on this answer. Apparently, I'm a little dense :(]
Is your 'Property' a class or a struct?
This test passes for me:
public class Property
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Value { get; set; }
}
public interface IPropertyBag { }
public class PropertyBag : IPropertyBag
{
public Property[] Properties { get; set; }
public Property this[string name]
{
get { return Properties.Where((e) => e.Name == name).Single(); }
set { Properties.Where((e) => e.Name == name).Single().Value = value.Value; }
}
}
[TestMethod]
public void TestMethod1()
{
var pb = new PropertyBag() { Properties = new Property[] { new Property { Name = "X", Value = "Y" } } };
Assert.AreEqual("Y", pb["X"].Value);
pb["X"] = new Property { Name = "X", Value = "Z" };
Assert.AreEqual("Z", pb["X"].Value);
}
I have to wonder why the getter returns a 'Property' instead of whatever datatype .Value, but I'm still curious why you're seeing a different result than what I am.