We Keep Coding

What is proper way to save data from file to object C#

what is proper way to save all lines from text file to objects. I have .txt file something like this
0001Marcus Aurelius 20021122160 21311
0002William Shakespeare 19940822332 11092
0003Albert Camus 20010715180 01232
From this file I know position of each data that is written in file, and all data are formatted.
Line number is from 0 to 3
Book author is from 4 to 30
Publish date is from 31 to 37
Page num. is from 38 to 43
Book code is from 44 to 49
I made class Data which holds information about start, end position, value, error.
Then I made class Line that holds list of type Data, and list that holds all error founded from some line. After load data from line to object Data I loop through lineError and add errors from all line to list, because I need to save errors from each line to database.
My question is this proper way to save data from file to object and after processing same data saving to database, advice for some better approach?
public class Data
{
public int startPosition = 0;
public int endPosition = 0;
public object value = null;
public string fieldName = "";
public Error error = null;
public Data(int start, int end, string name)
{
this.startPosition = start;
this.endPosition = end;
this.fieldName = name;
}
public void SetValueFromLine(string line)
{
string valueFromLine = line.Substring(this.startPosition, this.endPosition - this.startPosition);
// if else statment that checks validity of data (lenght, empty value)
this.value = valueFromLine;
}
}
public class Line
{
public List<Data> lineData = new List<Data>();
public List<Error> lineError = new List<Error>();
public Line()
{
AddObjectDataToList();
}
public void AddObjectDataToList()
{
lineData.Add(new Data(0, 3, "lineNumber"));
lineData.Add(new Data(4, 30, "bookAuthor"));
lineData.Add(new Data(31, 37, "publishData"));
lineData.Add(new Data(38, 43, "pageNumber"));
lineData.Add(new Data(44, 49, "bookCode"));
}
public void LoadLineDataToObjects(string line)
{
foreach(Data s in lineData)
{
s.SetValueFromLine(line);
}
}
public void GetAllErrorFromData()
{
foreach (Data s in lineData)
{
if(s.error != null)
{
lineError.Add(s.error);
}
}
}
}
public class File
{
public string fileName;
public List<Line> lines = new List<Line>();
}

I assume that the focus is on using OOP. I also assume that parsing is a secondary task and I will not consider options for its implementation.
First of all, it is necessary to determine the main acting object. Strange as it may seem, this is not a Book, but the string itself (e.g. DataLine). Initially, I wanted to create a Book from a string (through a separate constructor), but that would be a mistake.
What actions should be able to perform DataLine? - In fact, only one - process. I see two acceptable options for this method:
process returns Book or throws exceptions. (Book process())
process returns nothing, but interacts with another object. (void process(IResults result))
The first option has the following drawbacks:
It is difficult to test (although this applies to the second option). All validation is hidden inside DataLine.
It is impossible/difficult to return a few errors.
The program is aimed at working with incorrect data, so expected exceptions are often generated. This violates the ideology of exceptions. Also, there are small fears of slowing performance.
The second option is devoid of the last two drawbacks. IResults can contain methodserror(...), to return several errors, and success(Book book).
The testability of the process method can be significantly improved by adding IValidator. This object can be passed as a parameter to the DataLine constructor, but this is not entirely correct. First, this unnecessary expense of memory because it will not give us tangible benefits. Secondly, this does not correspond to the essence of the DataLine class. DataLine represents only a line that can be processed in one particular way. Thus, a good solution is the void process (IValidator validator, IResults result).
Summarize the above (may contain syntax errors):
interface IResults {
void error (string message);
void success (Book book);
}
interface IValidator {
// just example
bool checkBookCode (string bookCode);
}
class DataLine {
private readonly string _rawData;
// constructor
/////////////////
public void process (IValidator validator, IResults result) {
// parse _rawData
bool isValid = true; // just example! maybe better to add IResults.hasErrors ()
if (! validator.checkBookCode (bookCode)) {
result.error("Bad book code");
isValid = false;
}
if (isValid) {
result.success(new Book (...));
// or even result.success (...); to avoid cohesion (coupling?) with the Book
}
}
}
The next step is to create a model of the file with the lines. Here again there are many options and nuances, but I would like to pay attention to IEnumerable<DataLine>. Ideally, we need to create a DataLines class that will support IEnumerable<DataLine> and load from a file or from IEnumerable<string>. However, this approach is relatively complex and redundant, it makes sense only in large projects. A much simpler version:
interface DataLinesProvider {
IEnumerable <DataLine> Lines ();
}
class DataLinesFile implements DataLinesProvider {
private readonly string _fileName;
// constructor
////////////////////
IEnumerable <DataLine> Lines () {
// not sure that it's right
return File
. ReadAllLines (_fileName)
.Select (x => new DataLine (x));
}
}
You can infinitely improve the code, introduce new and new abstractions, but here you must start from common sense and a specific problem.
P. S. sorry for "strange" English. Google not always correctly translate such complex topics.

How to add to a class a string with two integers and show the sum

Greeting fellow programmers!
I am currently studying software development (I started not a month ago) and I have a problem that needs a solution. Underneath you can find the code and as you can see, the method WriteNumber needs help. I need to write the code in a way that when I run the program, on the console screen the following two lines will be shown:
Hello World!
81
The Main method code cannot be changed and also I cannot add more methods to the class Calculator so the code needs to be done only within the WriteNumbers method. I have tried a lot of things but I am still grasping how everything works so any help is welcome! Thank you in advance for your time.
Namespace CalculatorTest
{
class Calculator
{
public static string WriteText (string input)
{
return "" + input;
}
public static string WriteNumber()
{
}
}
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
string s = Calculator.WriteText("Hello World!");
Console.WriteLine(s);
string n = Calculator.WriteNumber(53 + 28);
Console.WriteLine(n);
Console.Read();
}
}

Not to do your homework for you to just be copied/pasted, hopefully I can give you some hints...
Notice how the method is being invoked:
Calculator.WriteNumber(53 + 28)
The 53 + 28 part happens first, then the result of that operation is passed to the method. That result, naturally, is 81. What's important about that is its type, which is an integer.
So, reasonably, the method signature needs to accept an int as a parameter. This would be done very similarly to how the other method accepts a string as a parameter:
public static string WriteText(string input)
What, then, does that method need to do with that input? Well, it's only a single value, so there aren't any calculations to be performed on it. It would appear that the method simply needs to return the value as a string. (It's your homework so you tell me, is that correct?)
This can be done with exactly two things:
Calling .ToString() on the value
Using the return keyword to return the result of that operation
(Note: The .ToString() operation does something very intuitive on value types, such as int or double or bool. As you progress into using reference types, you're going to find that it does something very different. Any time you have a custom class on which you want to call .ToString(), you'll need to override the .ToString() method on that class first.)

Please read David's answer, it's important that you make the effort to understand why this works the way it does. That being said:
public static string WriteNumber(int number)
{
return number.ToString();
}

Thank you all for your valuable input but special thanks to David because he showed where I made my error. I forgot that the two numbers in the main function will be summed up FIRST and THEN forwarded to the method in the class Calculator. After that got cleared up, it was easy to understand what to do (basically adjust the type of the input parameter to int).
namespace CalculatorTest
{
class Calculator
{
public static string WriteText (string input)
{
return "" + input;
}
public static string WriteNumber(int sumOfNumbers)
{
return "" + sumOfNumbers;
}
}
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
string s = Calculator.WriteText("Hello World!");
Console.WriteLine(s);
string n = Calculator.WriteNumber(53 + 28);
Console.WriteLine(n);
Console.Read();
}
}
}

Access to modified closure: ReSharper

I created a library that handles database access. I recently added transaction handling; however, I came across a small issue. To outline this, I wrote this sample for demonstration purposes:
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
String data = null;
DoAction(ref data, () =>
{
Console.WriteLine(data);
});
Console.ReadLine();
}
private static void DoAction(ref String data, Action action)
{
if (data == null)
data = "Initialized Data";
action();
}
}
I get "Access to modified closure" underline on the following code line for the 'data' variable:
Console.WriteLine(data);
I understand that the modification of the ref data variable can cause issues (e.g. when running foreach loops). However, in the following case, I don't see this to happen.
Here is another version with a loop changing the variable further - the output is as expected:
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
String data = null;
for (var i = 0; i < 10; i++)
DoAction(ref data, () =>
{
Console.WriteLine(data);
});
Console.ReadLine();
}
private static void DoAction(ref String data, Action action)
{
if (data == null)
data = "Initialized Data";
else
data += "|";
action();
}
}
ReSharper offers me to create a local variable, but I explicitly want to use the created string from the DoAction() method. If I would accept ReSharpers approach, it actually would break the code. Is there any other way to solve this problem? I'd like to use this Action approach, but I don't want ReSharper to complain about it either (and possibly not disable ReSharpers inspection).
Any suggestions?

I would suggest avoid using a ref parameter for this in the first place - it seems needlessly complicated to me. I'd rewrite DoAction as:
static string DoAction(string data, Action<string> action)
{
data = data == null ? "Initialized Data" : data + "|";
action(data);
return data;
}
Then you can have:
data = DoAction(data, Console.WriteLine);
or if you want to use a lambda expression:
data = DoAction(data, txt => Console.WriteLine(txt));
You can make DoAction a void method if you don't actually need the result afterwards. (It's not clear why you need the result to be returned and a delegate to execute in DoAction, but presumably that makes more sense in your wider context.)

In case you feel certain that the warning is not appropriate, there is the InstantHandleAttribute which is documented as:
Tells code analysis engine if the parameter is completely handled
when the invoked method is on stack. If the parameter is a delegate,
indicates that delegate is executed while the method is executed.
If the parameter is an enumerable, indicates that it is enumerated
while the method is executed.
I think is exactly what you want.
You can get the attribute from the JetBrains.Annotations package or alternatively as copy-paste from ReSharper options.

Design pattern for dynamic C# object

I have a queue that processes objects in a while loop. They are added asynchronously somewhere.. like this:
myqueue.pushback(String value);
And they are processed like this:
while(true)
{
String path = queue.pop();
if(process(path))
{
Console.WriteLine("Good!");
}
else
{
queue.pushback(path);
}
}
Now, the thing is that I'd like to modify this to support a TTL-like (time to live) flag, so the file path would be added o more than n times.
How could I do this, while keeping the bool process(String path) function signature? I don't want to modify that.
I thought about holding a map, or a list that counts how many times the process function returned false for a path and drop the path from the list at the n-th return of false. I wonder how can this be done more dynamically, and preferably I'd like the TTL to automatically decrement itself at each new addition to the process. I hope I am not talking trash.
Maybe using something like this
class JobData
{
public string path;
public short ttl;
public static implicit operator String(JobData jobData) {jobData.ttl--; return jobData.path;}
}

I like the idea of a JobData class, but there's already an answer demonstrating that, and the fact that you're working with file paths give you another possible advantage. Certain characters are not valid in file paths, and so you could choose one to use as a delimiter. The advantage here is that the queue type remains a string, and so you would not have to modify any of your existing asynchronous code. You can see a list of reserved path characters here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filename#Reserved_characters_and_words
For our purposes, I'll use the percent (%) character. Then you can modify your code as follows, and nothing else needs to change:
const int startingTTL = 100;
const string delimiter = "%";
while(true)
{
String[] path = queue.pop().Split(delimiter.ToCharArray());
int ttl = path.Length > 1?--int.Parse(path[1]):startingTTL;
if(process(path[0]))
{
Console.WriteLine("Good!");
}
else if (ttl > 0)
{
queue.pushback(string.Format("{0}{1}{2}", path[0], delimiter,ttl));
}
else
{
Console.WriteLine("TTL expired for path: {0}" path[0]);
}
}
Again, from a pure architecture standpoint, a class with two properties is a better design... but from a practical standpoint, YAGNI: this option means you can avoid going back and changing other asynchronous code that pushes into the queue. That code still only needs to know about the strings, and will work with this unmodified.
One more thing. I want to point out that this is a fairly tight loop, prone to running away with a cpu core. Additionally, if this is the .Net queue type and your tight loop gets ahead of your asynchronous produces to empty the queue, you'll throw an exception, which would break out of the while(true) block. You can solve both issues with code like this:
while(true)
{
try
{
String[] path = queue.pop().Split(delimiter.ToCharArray());
int ttl = path.Length > 1?--int.Parse(path[1]):startingTTL;
if(process(path[0]))
{
Console.WriteLine("Good!");
}
else if (ttl > 0)
{
queue.pushback(string.Format("{0}{1}{2}", path[0], delimiter,ttl));
}
else
{
Console.WriteLine("TTL expired for path: {0}" path[0]);
}
}
catch(InvalidOperationException ex)
{
//Queue.Dequeue throws InvalidOperation if the queue is empty... sleep for a bit before trying again
Thread.Sleep(100);
}
}

If the constraint is that bool process(String path) cannot be touched/changed then put the functionality into myqueue. You can keep its public signatures of void pushback(string path) and string pop(), but internally you can track your TTL. You can either wrap the string paths in a JobData-like class that gets added to the internal queue, or you can have a secondary Dictionary keyed by path. Perhaps even something as simple as saving the last poped path and if the subsequent push is the same path you can assume it was a rejected/failed item. Also, in your pop method you can even discard a path that has been rejected too many time and internally fetch the next path so the calling code is blissfully unaware of the issue.

You could abstract/encapsulate the functionality of the "job manager". Hide the queue and implementation from the caller so you can do whatever you want without the callers caring. Something like this:
public static class JobManager
{
private static Queue<JobData> _queue;
static JobManager() { Task.Factory.StartNew(() => { StartProcessing(); }); }
public static void AddJob(string value)
{
//TODO: validate
_queue.Enqueue(new JobData(value));
}
private static StartProcessing()
{
while (true)
{
if (_queue.Count > 0)
{
JobData data = _queue.Dequeue();
if (!process(data.Path))
{
data.TTL--;
if (data.TTL > 0)
_queue.Enqueue(data);
}
}
else
{
Thread.Sleep(1000);
}
}
}
private class JobData
{
public string Path { get; set; }
public short TTL { get; set; }
public JobData(string value)
{
this.Path = value;
this.TTL = DEFAULT_TTL;
}
}
}
Then your processing loop can handle the TTL value.
Edit - Added a simple processing loop. This code isn't thread safe, but should hopefully give you an idea.

How do I return results while inside a loop in C#?

Essentially, I have a Do..While loop going through some lines from a text file. I want to process a line, return a value (worked or didn't), then move to the next line.
I have a function called ProcessTXT that accepts 2 strings. Source and Destination of new file.
Is there a way to set a ReturnedValue string = to the result and have the backgroundworker check to see if the variable changed? And if so, add this value to the list box?
private void TranslatePOD(string strSource, string strDest,)
{
TextWriter tw = new StreamWriter(strDest);
TextReader tr = new StreamReader(strSource);
do
{
//My Code doing stuff
//Need to send a result somehow now, but i have more work to do in this loop
//Then using tw.writeline() to write my results to my new file
} while (tr.ReadLine() != null);
}
EDIT: Current test code using Yield. My output is "TestingGround.Form1+d__0". Did i do something wrong?
namespace TestingGround
{
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
static IEnumerable<string> TestYield(string strSource)
{
TextReader tr = new StreamReader(strSource);
string strCurLine = System.String.Empty;
while ((strCurLine = tr.ReadLine()) != null)
{
yield return strCurLine;
}
}
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
}
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
string MySource = System.String.Empty;
MySource = #"C:\PODTest\Export Script\Export\Shipment List.csv";
listBox1.Items.Add(TestYield(MySource));
}
}

Yield is typically used to return results iteratively, or streaming. There are plenty of examples online. There's one on SO for reading in a file.

It sounds like this is a good case for a producer/consumer queue. C# 4.0 introduced BlockingCollection, which is great for this. Create the blocking collection and ensure that both this process, and whatever needs to consume the results you are passing have access to it. This method can add items to the queue, and whatever is reading the results can use the Take method, which will block [wait] until there is at least one item to take out. The collection is specifically designed to work in multithreaded environments; all of the operations are logically atomic.