I am converting a project to Prism/MEF and need to download the list of modules from a central db
however the "list downloader" instance Reference is set to null so assuming the code is not in the right place
Here's the flow
public class Bootstrapper : MefBootstrapper {
[Import]
IMyList sync1 { get; set; }
...
protected override void ConfigureAggregateCatalog() {
**sync1.Sync(); // sync1 is null**
AggregateCatalog.Catalogs.Add(....)
}
...
}
[Export(typeof(IMyList))]
private class DBSync : IMyList {
[Import] IDBConn mydb { get; set; }
public void Sync(){
// connects to mydb and gets a list of auth modules for the current user
}
}
the prob is sync1 iS NULL !! why ?
I know i am doing something wrong but this is my 1st prism project from scratch so pls go easy
You are using sync1 to configure your catalogs. Is it possible you haven't composed your parts yet ?
For Bootstrapper's parts to be compsosed it needs to be instantiated by MEF, for example by using GetExportedValue<>, otherwise IMyList will be null.
If so you will need to change your code so that MEF already has a part for IMyList in it's catalog, and then add additional parts.
If this is not your problem, another possible source of the problem could be a composition error when satisfying one of DBSync imports, ie:
[Import] IDBConn mydb { get; set; }
In this case you should get an exception. You could try running the program in debug while setting the option to break on all Common Language Runtime Exceptions.
EDIT :
If your container is null it won't be able to compose the imports in your bootstrapper class. MEf imports it's components when it instantiate the class. You can't rely on imports being available before the container is created.
You will have to :
Change IMyList sync1 so that's it's not an import anymore.
If you really need to have your IMyList composed by MEF, you will need to create a temporary container (no need to use the MefBootStrapper) and use this temporary container just to compose the parts in your bootstrapper class. You can dispose it afterwards. See this other answer (Satisfy Imports in custom ExportProvider).
I would really recommend going with the first option tough, changing sync1 so it's not an import, unless you have a compelling reason to do so.
As far as I can see you have not exported IMyList. Therefor I think you need to put an export attribute on the line before private class DBCon
I hope this helps...
Nigel...
Related
I am trying to create tools for a game to learn, as well as improve my own playing experience.
The primary .NET assembly, csass.dll, that controls the client is heavily obfuscated, and I have no control over this .dll-file at all and reading it's code is very time consuming. The game also includes a mainapi.dll which handles the communication between server and client. I have full control over this assembly and I can listen to the servers responses and send my own requests, which already gives me some pretty nice functionality, however there are some limitations I'd like to work around.
csass.dll references mainapi.dll, by default mainapi does not reference csass. In csass.dll there is a class, let's call it clickHandler, that has a public, non-static method ClickObj() of return type void. I want to call this method from within mainapi.dll, but I have no idea how to go about this, given that I have to leave csass.dll untouched.
Are there any feasible ways to 'retrieve' a clickHandler object (to then call its ClickObj() method) from within the mainapi assembly, without making any changes in csass.dll? Appreciate any and all input!
Create an interface:
public interface IClickHandler
{
void ClickObject();
}
Now create a helper class implementing that interface:
using CsAss;
public class ObjectClicker : IClickHandler
{
CsAss _csass;
public ObjectClicker(CsAss csass)
{
_csass = csass;
}
public void ClickObject()
{
_csass.clickObject();
}
}
Add a dependency on an instance of the interface into your MainAPI class:
public class MainApi
{
IClickHandler _clickHandler;
public MainApi(IClickHandler clickHandler)
{
_clickHandler = clickHandler;
// Now you have a class that can call the click handler for you
}
}
Now wire it all up:
public void StartupMethod()
{
var csass = new CsAss();
IClickHandler clickHandler = new ObjectClicker(csass);
var main = new MainApi(clickHandler);
// TODO: Start your app now that MainApi is properly configured
}
That last step is the only potentially tricky part, depending on your project layout. You need something that can create an instance of CsAss, MainApi and ObjectClicker. Normally I would solve that with the dependency injection (DI) pattern, either using a framework such as Autofac or so-called "poor man's DI" by manually instantiating from a central startup method. That gets a little more difficult with Unity since there isn't an easily accessible startup point. You could start looking into https://github.com/svermeulen/Zenject and go from there for options.
I have a Winforms application that is designed to integrate with external software packages. This application reads data from these packages and pushes it to our server where users log in and use our application (App).
public abstract ClassToImplement
{
public abstract void DefinedMethod1();
public abstract void DefinedMethod2();
}
When we designed the application it was intended to do 95% of the integration work with the remaining 5% (implementation class / App2) being developed by a consultant who's familiar with the 3rd party software.
public class Implemented : ClassToImplement{
public override void DefinedMethod1(...);
public override void DefinedMethod2(...);
}
The "App" outputs a Class Library which is then referenced in the Implementation (App2). In our design we created an Abstract Class and defined the methods. The idea was that the consultant would download the repo for the implementation class and include the App as a reference. They would then write the necessary code for the methods they're implementing, compile and "voila!"
For obvious reasons I don't want to share the source project with external developers, otherwise I'd just share the full solution and use a single app, and, while I know they can see a lot with the DLL reference, it is just easier for us to control everything.
The problem comes with App: the main application algorithm needs to instantiate the implementation class and then the program runs perfectly.
in Form1.cs of App:
ClassToImplement impObj = new Implemented();
impObj.DefinedMethod1();
impObj.DefinedMethod2();
The challenge I'm having is that I cannot build "App" to output a DLL without instantiating the Class. I cannot instantiate the Implemented Class as I haven't got the code (yet).
It would be great to know how to go about achieving this sort of abstraction with a dependancy on (yet) unwritten code and also, what is the technical term for what I'm trying to do?
To make it just "work" use a Func which returns an instance of the abstract class.
In your secret repo:
//Your "App" DLL Project
public abstract class ClassToImplement
{
public abstract void DefinedMethod1();
public abstract void DefinedMethod2();
}
public class App : Form
{
public App(Func<ClassToImplement> initiator)
{
InitializeComponent();
ClassToImplement ci = initiator.Invoke();
ci.DefinedMethod1();
ci.DefinedMethod2();
}
}
//This is in a separate project which will be your startup project internally
public class Dummy : ClassToImplement
{
public override void DefinedMethod1(){}
public override void DefinedMethod2(){}
}
public class Program
{
public static void Main()
{
Application.Run(new App(()=> new Dummy()));
}
}
In the repo shared with the consultant:
// In the repo which is shared with the consultant
// This will be the startup project on the build server, and when the consultant is testing.
public class Implementation : ClassToImplement
{
public override void DefinedMethod1(){}
public override void DefinedMethod2(){}
}
public class Program
{
public static void Main()
{
Application.Run(new App(()=> new Implementation()));
}
}
On your build server, you can pull from both the repos, and set the startup project as the one given to the consultant. But when you are testing and developing internally, you set the startup project to your version with an implementation that does nothing.
As a side note, if you think what you are doing needs to be protected from consultants who have signed a confidentiality agreement, make sure to obfuscate when you do a release.
This is a two-step process usually:
Locate and load the assembly/dll:
Assembly assembly = Assembly.LoadFrom(DLL);
Instantiate the implemented class:
Type type = assembly.GetType(FullNameOfImplemented);
AppInstance = (ClassToImplement)Activator.CreateInstance(type, parameters);
The process you are looking for is often called stubbing. In this case you've chosen to encapsulate the integration functionality in a library, not web services, but the principle is the same.
The idea was that the consultant would download the repo for the implementation class and include the App as a reference.
This sounds like you've got the dependency relationship the wrong way round. If the consultant's code references your app, then your app can't reference it - it'd be a circular dependency. Instead, factor your app something more in line with the following:
App
|
|
App.Integration.Contracts
^ ^
| |
| App.Integration.Stub
|
App.Integration
The abstract class - it could just as easily be an interface in C# - resides in the Contracts assembly. This is the only compiled dependency your application has. Then at runtime use configuration to load either the stub, or the full implementation using an IoC container. An example is Unity for which you will need its configuration API. Reference the true type to use in the configuration file and change only that to update your application to use the full functionality.
First off I think you need to implement a proper plugin system if you dont want to share your code with that other developers.
Second you should code against your interface and not against its implementation. First because you dont have it and second because you may want to switch implementations for different 3rd party software.
If you need an instance for testing or stuff, you can use a handwritten mock or an mocking framework. If you need a real instance later on (when the other developers have delivered) you can use some design pattern like factory pattern or others for the creation. Try to avoid the new keyword if you want to change implementations later on.
I've been working with Caliburn.Micro and MEF and I'm trying to get a viewmodelfactory implementation working. What I'm attempting is to create a chain of ViewModels for a dialog window (each ViewModel instantiates one or more viewmodels to generate the overall layout of the window). I'm having trouble importing the viewmodelfactory correctly; I can get it without a problem using [ImportingConstructor], however when I try to use [import] I end up with a null reference exception against viewModelFactory.
The "ViewModelFactory" which I have implemented is as per:
http://blog.pglazkov.com/2011/04/mvvm-with-mef-viewmodelfactory.html
and I'm trying to import the viewmodel as per the following:
[Import]
public IViewModelFactory viewModelFactory { get; set; }
and IViewModelFactory itself has an export declared (and works correctly with [ImportingConstructor]
[Export(typeof(IViewModelFactory))]
[PartCreationPolicy(CreationPolicy.Shared)]
public class ViewModelFactory : IViewModelFactory
Attempt 2
MY next effort was trying to add an instance of ViewModelFactory into the composition container:
protected override void Configure()
{
var catalog =
new AggregateCatalog(
AssemblySource.Instance.Select(x => new AssemblyCatalog(x)).OfType<ComposablePartCatalog>());
container = new CompositionContainer(catalog);
var batch = new CompositionBatch();
batch.AddExportedValue<IWindowManager>(new WindowManager());
batch.AddExportedValue<IEventAggregator>(new EventAggregator());
batch.AddExportedValue<IViewModelFactory>(new ViewModelFactory());
batch.AddExportedValue(container);
container.Compose(batch);
}
However this results in an error within the ViewModelFactory, stating that the composition container which is Lazy loaded is null.
I'm trying to find a solution that will allow me to still use the Factory approach, as it allows me to use constructor parameters which are currently required as part of my viewmodels.
EDIT
I was able to get this to work by having an "Initialise" function within my viewmodels, using [ImportingConstructor] on my ViewModels with a constructor that only contains the IViewModelFactory declaration. However, this now required me to instantiate the viewmodel and make a call to the "initialise" function whenever I am creating these, so a more elegant approach would be great.
Thanks.
Managed to implement a different solution to this, which was to use:
IoC.Get<*ViewModelName*>();
Still haven't worked out why the [Import] by itself didn't work, however this certainly solved the issue for me.
I am working on developing a plug and play framework in ASP.Net MVC whereby I can define modules as separate projects from the Main project. So, a developer can create as many modules as they want.
What I need is that to be able to update settings of any of such modules. For that, in the main project, I defined a base class for some common settings plus each module has its own custom settings. When there is any edit on a module, I have to instantiate instance of that module in the main project. But, main project has no knowledge of any modules.
How do I achieve this?
Thanks!
You can use dependency injection and inject those modules to your application at composition root. As per configuration you can use code or xml (configuration file). You can do auto wiring, late binding etc depending on what you really need.
You can also have initializers at each module so whenever you register a module, it should initialize your registered modules and inject dependencies etc.
Depending on your need, you would have to create a solution that relies on interfaces.
Essentially, the application exposes an API dll with an interface called IModule. IModule has one method called Run(). Your main application will load up the module's assembly, look for something that implements IModule, makes one of those objects and calls Run() on it.
Here is an old article describing how to host a sandbox to run modules inside.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc163701.aspx
namespace MyApplication.Api
{
public interface IModule
{
void Run();
}
}
The developer would create something like this
public class MyObject : MarshalByRefObject, IModule
{
public void Run()
{
// do something here
}
}
The application will load it up with some kind of Reflection.
public void LoadModule()
{
var asm = System.Reflection.Assembly.Load(/* Get the developer module name from somewhere*/);
var types = asm.GetExportedTypes();
foreach(var t in types)
{
foreach(var i = t.GetInterfaces())
{
if(i == typeof(IModule))
{
var iModule = System.Activator.CreateInstance(t);
iModule.Run();
}
}
}
}
It would be best if you run the code in another appDomain, but it adds a lot of complexity.
public void LoadModuleInAppDomain()
{
// Spin up a new AppDomain
// Load the assembly into the app domain
// Get the object
// Call the Run Method
}
I've been trying to inject the modules from my ModuleCatalog into my Shell's ViewModel but I'm not having much luck...
I'm creating the ModuleCatalog in my Bootstrapper and my module is getting onto the screen from its Initializer without problem. However, I'd love to be able to bind my list of modules to a container with a DataTemplate which allowed them to be launched from a menu!
Here's my Boostrapper file, I'll be adding more modules as times goes on, but for now, it just contains my rather contrived "ProductAModule":
public class Bootstrapper : UnityBootstrapper
{
protected override void ConfigureContainer()
{
Container.RegisterType<IProductModule>();
base.ConfigureContainer();
}
protected override IModuleCatalog GetModuleCatalog()
{
return new ModuleCatalog()
.AddModule(typeof(ProductAModule));
}
protected override DependencyObject CreateShell()
{
var view = Container.Resolve<ShellView>();
var viewModel = Container.Resolve<ShellViewModel>();
view.DataContext = viewModel;
view.Show();
return view;
}
}
Following on from that, here's my Shell's ViewModel:
public class ShellViewModel : ViewModelBase
{
public List<IProductModule> Modules { get; set; }
public ShellViewModel(List<IProductModule> modules)
{
modules.Sort((a, b) => a.Name.CompareTo(b));
Modules = modules;
}
}
As you can see, I'm attempting to inject a List of IProductModule (to which ProductAModule inherits some of its properties and methods) so that it can then be bound to my Shell's View. Is there something REALLY simple I'm missing or can it not be done using the Unity IoC? (I've seen it done with StructureMap's extension for Prism)
One more thing... When running the application, at the point the ShellViewModel is being resolved by the Container in the Bootstrapper, I receive the following exception:
Resolution of the dependency failed, type = "PrismBasic.Shell.ViewModels.ShellViewModel", name = "". Exception message is: The current build operation (build key Build Key[PrismBasic.Shell.ViewModels.ShellViewModel, null]) failed: The parameter modules could not be resolved when attempting to call constructor PrismBasic.Shell.ViewModels.ShellViewModel(System.Collections.Generic.List`1[[PrismBasic.ModuleBase.IProductModule, PrismBasic.ModuleBase, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null]] modules). (Strategy type BuildPlanStrategy, index 3)
Anyway, simple huh... Looks bemused...
Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Rob
I think you could probably just do this:
public class Bootstrapper : UnityBootstrapper
{
protected override void ConfigureContainer()
{
Container.RegisterType<IProductModule>();
base.ConfigureContainer();
}
private static ObservableCollection<IProductModule> _productModules = new Obser...();
public static ObservableCollection<IProductModule> ProductModules
{
get { return _productModules; }
}
protected override IModuleCatalog GetModuleCatalog()
{
var modCatalog = new ModuleCatalog()
.AddModule(typeof(ProductAModule));
//TODO: add all modules to ProductModules collection
return modCatalog;
}
...
}
Then you would have a static property that anything could bind to directly, or could be used from your ViewModel.
Here is how to get a list of module names that have been registered with the module catalog.
public class MyViewModel : ViewModel
{
public ObservableCollection<string> ModuleNames { ... }
public MyViewModel(IModuleCatalog catalog)
{
ModuleNames = new ObservableCollection<string>(catalog.Modules.Select(mod => mod.ModuleName));
}
}
That's pretty much it. IModuleCatalog and IModuleManager are the only things that are setup in the container for you to access in terms of the modules. As I said, though, you won't get any instance data because these modules (hopefully) are yet to be created. You can only access Type data.
Hope this helps.
I think you misunderstood the purpose of the modules. The modules are just containers for the views and services that you wish too use. The shell on the other hand should just contain the main layout of your application.
What I think you should do is to define a region in your shell, and then register the views (which in your case are buttons) with that region.
How you wish do deploy your views and services in terms of modules is more related to what level of modularity you're looking for, i.e. if you want to be able to deploy the views and services of ModuleA independently of the views and services of ModuleB and so on. In your case it might be enough to register everything in one single module.
Take some time to play around with the examples provided with the documentation, they are quite good.
The reason why your examples throws an example is because your ShellViewModel is depending on List and that type is not registered in Unity. Furthermore you're registering IProductModule with Unity, which makes no sense because an Interface cannot be constructed.
I think I encountered a similar problem today, it turns out that PRISM creates the shell before initializing the modules, so you can't inject any services from the modules into the shell itself.
Try creating another module that depends on all of the others and implements the functionality you want, then you can add it to a region in the shell to display your list of services. Unfortunately I haven't had a chance to try it yet, but this is the solution I plan on implementing.
As a side note, I think you need to mark the property with an attribute to use property injection, but I could be mistake (it's been a while since I played with Unity directly).
Edit: You need to apply the DependencyAttribute to properties to use setter injection in Unity; you can read about it here.
var modules = new IProductModule[]
{
Container.Resolve<ProductAModule>()
//Add more modules here...
};
Container.RegisterInstance<IProductModule[]>(modules);
That's it! Using this code, I can inject my modules into the ShellViewModel and display each module as a button in my application!
SUCH a simple resolution! From a great guy on the CompositeWPF Discussion group. I recommend them without reserve ^_^