We Keep Coding

How to use delegate to point a bunch of logs written to .txt to somewhere else? C#

I just learned about delegates and the publisher/subscriber pattern, however I have been having some problem implementing them in my current code, mainly because Im not sure what should be assign to what(I shall explain this).
I have a class, example Class A. It is a library class that contains codes that write logs into .txt file. I would like to be able to take these logs and write them somewhere else, example another .txt file/TextBox/RichTextBox.
Class A
//Just a library class for log functions
//Declare and instantiate the delegate
public void delegate myDel(string message)
public myDel customDel, customDel2
LogCategory(string category)
{
//Bunch of codes that separates the log into category Info/Warn/Error
WriteLog()
}
WriteLog()
{
StreamWriter sw = new StreamWriter(LogFilePath)
//writes logs into .txt file1
}
then in a separate class
Class B
//This is the main program where all the logs are written
public void PrintLog(string message)
{
Class A ca = new Class A();
ca.LogCategory();
}
public void delegateTheLogs()
{
//how do I use customDel to write the logs to another text file in a
//different directory
}
The idea is that delegate is suppose to:
act as a pointer
allow the program to write logs to multiple destination at the same time
The question is what do I use customDel for and how do I use it catch the logs and write them somewhere?
I think this is an interesting topic, and if anyone knows how to do this, please help me figure this out.
Oh and Im not interested in using events, I know delegate and events are pretty common to use together.
Thanks

Following on from my comment, here's an example. We have a class called FlexibleLogger that basically knows how to format stuff that it is given but it doesn't have any baked in ability to write the log data to anywhere, the idea being that the code that creates the logger also creates the routine that the logger will use to output:
public class FlexibleLogger{
Action<string> _logWriterAction;
public FlexibleLogger(Action<string> logWriterAction){
_logWriterAction = logWriterAction;
}
public Log(string message){
_logWriterAction($"{DateTime.UtcNow}: {Message}");
}
public Log(Exception ex){
Log(ex.Message);
}
}
This class doesn't know how to write a file, or console, or post the message to a web service, or email it, or put it in a rabbit queue etc.. all it knows how to do is formulate a log message provided into having a time at the start, or pull the message out of an exception(and then pass it to the method that puts a time at the start), and then call the Action (a neater way of declaring a delegate that takes arguments of various types and returns no value) passing in the message
The Action is some variable(able to be varied) method created by you
We might use it like this:
public class Program
{
public static void Main()
{
//it's a "local function", IMHO a neater way of providing a method that can be passed as an action
void consoleWriterFunc(string f){
Console.WriteLine(f);
};
//see the thing we pass as the Action parameter is a method/function,
//not a data item like a string, int, Person etc
var logger = new FlexibleLogger(consoleWriterFunc);
//log will make a string like "12-Dec-2020 12:34:56: a"
//and invoke the consoleWriterFunc, passing the string into it
//in turn it prints to the console
logger.Log("a");
//how about a logger that writes a file?
void fileWriterFunc(string f){
File.AppendAllText("c:\\temp\\some.log", f);
};
logger = new FlexibleLogger(fileWriterFunc);
logger.Log(new Exception("something bad happened"));
}
}
Doesn't have to be a local function, you can pass any method at all that takes a string and returns a void, as your Action<string>. It doesn't even have to be a method you wrote:
var sw = new System.IO.StringWriter();
var logger = new FlexibleLogger(sw.Write);
logger.Log("I'm now in the string writer" );
Microsoft wrote the method StringWriter.Write- it takes a strong, returns a void and calling logger.Log having passed the Write method of that stribgwriter instance means that the logger will Log into the stringwriter (a wrapper around a stringbuilder)
Hopefully this helps you understand that a delegate is "just a way to make a method into something you can pass as a parameter, just like anything else. They've been available for years, if you think about it, manifested as events. Microsoft have no idea what you want to do when you click a button, so they just have the button expose an event, which is really just a collection of delegates; a List of methods that the button should call when it's clicked.

Finding attributes of function enclosing a closure/lambda

I have an extension function as such...
public static class EventLibrary
{
[EventCollection]
public static Event Sequence(this Event ev)
{
ev.Started += (args) =>
{
// do something!
}
}
}
I then, inside Event, I look at the delegate subscribers using the following...
var dels = new List<Delegate[]>();
if (Started != null)
dels.Add(Started.GetInvocationList());
The reason is to try and detect whether the function that created the closure has an attribute, as in this example, EventCollection. On the Delegate object, both DelcaringType and ReflectedType return something like EventLibrary+<Sequence>c_AnonStorey1 but this is as far as I get.
I would love to do this without any string operations but I'm not sure it's possible... Does anyone know?

I believe there is no way to do that reliably. The closest you can do is to get the DeclaringType, but there isn't anything like DeclaringMethod.
It seems you already noticed you could try using the name of the lambda method, but doing so would be fragile (what about method overloads?) and might not work the same in other languages (like VB.NET) or future versions of the compiler.
I think the best way to do this is to somehow configure Event to tell it what you want. Possibly something like:
var eventCollectionEvent = ev.EventCollection;
eventCollectionEvent.Started += …;

How to replace lambda delegate

(removed unnecessary clutter)
Edit 1
Seems that my questions are not very clear... doh... :)
So ....
How to write this:
instance.Method(e => OtherClass.Fill(e, instance2.A, instance3.B));
with something like this:
instance.Method(new Action<IDataReader>(OtherClass.Fill));
When "Method" signature is:
void Method(Action<IDataReader> reader)
and "Fill" signature is:
void Fill(IDataReader reader, string a, string b);
Update
I figured out one alternative implementation, but it still causes debugger to step in to that Fill call. There's no anymore lambda notation but it still seems to step in, argh...
instance.Method(delegate(IDataReader e) { OtherClass.Fill(e, instance2.A, instance3.B); });
Solution
Seems that I just need one additional method which is called from delegate and that method then passes call to next method (Fill) with two more parameters:
instance.Method(this.Foo);
[DebuggerStepThrough()]
private void Foo(IDataReader reader)
{
OtherClass.Fill(reader, this.instance2.A, this.instance3.B)
}

The thing is, somewhere your code must pass those extra parameters, and your debugging experience will walk over that process. The best I can offer you is to wrap the parameter passing a little.
Either:
Action<IDataReader> wrapper = reader => this.Fill(reader, instance2.A, instance3.B);
instance.Method(wrapper);
or:
Func<Action<IDataReader, string, string>, Action<IDataReader>> reducer = arity3 => reader => arity3(reader, instance2.A, instance3.B);
instance.Method(reducer(this.Fill));
But obviously, either solution is still going to have the debugger 'walk' over the code. You can't pass parameters without actually passing the parameters.

What is the Behavior of a Dynamic Attribute in a Static (Extension) Class in C# (MVC3)

I am new to developing in .NET and C#, but have been a long-time developer, working with C, C++, Java, PHP, etc.
I have an MVC3 extension class for my data models that refers to the database. It is set as "private static" in the class, but I think that it is not keeping up with database changes. In other words, when I change data in the controllers, those changes aren't "noticed" in the db because it is static. Currently, I am creating and disposing of the variable for each use, to compensate.
My questions are:
Am I correct that a static db variable could behave that way?
Is it necessary to dispose of the dynamic variable in the static class, or will garbage collection still take care of it automatically?
Here is a relevant snippet of the class:
namespace PBA.Models {
using System;
using System.Text.RegularExpressions;
using PBA.Models;
using PBA.Controllers;
public static class Extensions {
private static PbaDbEntities db = null;
public static PbaDbEntities GetDb() {
// TODO: find out about static memory/disposal, etc.
//
if (db != null) {
db.Dispose();
}
db = new PbaDbEntities();
return db;
}
public static string GetCheckpointState(this Activity activity, long memberProjectId) {
GetDb(); // TODO: Do I need to do this each time, or will a one-time setting work?
string state = CheckpointController.CHECKPOINT_STATUS_NOT_STARTED;
try {
var sub = db.ActivitySubmissions.
Where(s => s.activityId == activity.activityId).
Where(s => s.memberProjectId == memberProjectId).
OrderByDescending(s => s.submitted).
First();
if (sub != null) {
state = sub.checkpointStatusId;
}
}
catch (Exception e) {
// omitted for brevity
}
return state;
}
}
}

Your code will fail horribly in production.
DataContexts are not thread-safe; you must not share a context between requests.
Never put mutable objects in static fields in multi-threaded applications.

Ignoring exceptions that way is a terrible idea, if you don't want to handle exceptions just don't try/catch, or catch & rethrow. Think about it like this, after you've buried the exception, your program is in an invalid state, b/c something you have no control over error'd out. Now, b/c you've buried the exception, your program can continue to operate but it's in a bad state.
If your code makes it to production, 3.5 yrs from now some jr. programmer is going to get involved in some middle of the night firestorm because all of a sudden the website is broken, even though it used to work. It will be completely impossible to track down where the exception is happening so, this poor guy is going to spend 48 straight hours adding logging code all over the place to track down the problem. He will find that some DBA somewhere decided to rename the column MemberProjectId to MemberProjectIdentifier, which caused your linq to blow up.
Think of the children, handle exceptions, don't bury them.
btw - yes, i have been that guy that has to figure out these types of mistakes.

It seems like you need to read about mvc3 and entity framework before writing coding and asking in here for help on something that's coded full of bad practices.
Answering your questions:
1- no
2- makes no sense as the answer to 1
Do it right, here are some useful documentation: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ie/gg416514(v=vs.98).aspx
EDIT: Adding some explicit fix
You could access your dbcontext from an static class, something like this:
var context = DbProvider.CurrentDb;
The idea is to access your db from here always: from your extension methods and from your controller actions.
Then, the implementation of the DbProvider.CurrentDb will be something like this:
public static classDbProvider {
public static void Initialize(){
HttpContext.Current.ApplicationInstance.BeginRequest += CreateDb;
HttpConetxt.Current.ApplicationInstance.EndRequest += DisposeDb;
}
private static void CreateDb(object sender, EventArgs e) {
HttpContext.Items.Add("CurrentDb", new PbaDbEntities(););
}
private static void DisposeDb(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Current.Dispose();
HttpContext.Items.Remove("CurrentDb");
}
public static PbaDbEntities CurrentDb{
get {
return (PbaDbEntities)HttpContext.Current.Items["CurrentDb"];
}
}
}
As you can see, it will create a new Db per each request and it will be available ONLY in that request. In that way, your db will be disposed at the end of each request. This pattern is called Open-Session-in-View.
Finally, you need to initialize the DbProvider calling the method
Initialize() in your Global.asax file, in the event Application_start.
Hope it helps.

I don't have any idea of the context here-- if db is simply a connection-like object or not, but it appears you are throwing away and recreating whatever it is unnecessarily.
Best to create a property (for whatever your doing) so to be consistent.
private static Thing _thing;
private static Thing thing{
get{
if(_thing==null){
_thing=new Thing();
}
return _thing;
}
}

C# Delegates & guid.newguid()

I just started using C# this afternoon, so be a little gentle.
Currently I am working on a type of "template engine" where one of the callbacks needs to generate a globally unique ID. I am using delegates to manage the callbacks.
Currently the code looks like this (though I have also tried an anonymous function & returning NewGuid directly w/o a variable):
static string UID(List<string> p)
{
string s = Guid.NewGuid().ToString();
return s;
}
Which, when called directly, works fine. However if I try to call it via the delegate (added to a StringDictionary via addCallback("generate UID", new CallbackWrapper(UID))), the program will generate the same GUID regardless of how many times I duplicate it; even though calling the method directly both before & after the event occurs results in a unique ID as expected. I'v
No doubt it's just something simple I've missed, inevitably stemming from me being relatively inexperienced at C#.
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks.
Well, I've now tried Dictionary with the same result.
CallbackWrapper is just the delegate, it's defined like this:
delegate string CallbackWrapper(List<string> parameters);
The remainder of the work is done in another class, which looks like this:
class TemplateParser
{
private Dictionary<string, CallbackWrapper> callbackMap;
public TemplateParser(string directivePrefix, string directiveSuffix)
{
...
callbackMap = new Dictionary<string,CallbackWrapper>();
}
public TemplateParser() : this("<!-- {", "} -->") {}
{
callbackMap.Add(name, callback);
}
public string parse(string filename)
{
...
string replacement =
callbackMap[directiveName](new List<string>(parameters.Split(new string[] { ";", " " }, StringSplitOptions.RemoveEmptyEntries));
...
}
}
I've stripped out the majority of the string handling code to save some space.

The issue is in your calling code, not in the code itself, nor in the delegate.
Using delegates here definitely works if called correctly.
Furthermore, your code can be slightly simplified:
static string UID(List<string> p)
{
return Guid.NewGuid().ToString();
}
(The variable is utterly redundant.)

use delegate.invoke
The difference between direct function call and delegate.invoke is here
http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en/csharplanguage/thread/f629c34d-6523-433a-90b3-bb5d445c5587

StringDictionary will automatically cast your CallbackWrapper to a string, meaning it will only run once and store the output of CallbackWrapper.ToString(). This is probably not what you want.
Try using Dictionary<string, CallbackWrapper> instead.