We Keep Coding

Avoiding usage of Enums for abstraction and dependency injection, struggling at concept

So right now I am trying to design a new hire program that grants access to active directory groups, generates documents with their information and location.
Right now I am doing this with an enumeration, with a switch statement that sets the details on the ViewModel like this:
case CaneRidgeSettings.Departments.SCSC:
Model.ScannerFolder = #"scan1\Supply Chain Service Center\" + Model.UserId;
Model.ExtensionRanges = "list station 8000 to-ext 8349";
Model.AdministrativeAssistant = Loader.SCSCAdminAssistant;
Model.DuoCode = "Franklin TN - 8175";
Model.PrinterSelectedIndex = (int)CaneRidgeSettings.PrinterGroups.Cane_Ridge_5th_Floor_West;
return await find.FindNextComputer("800SCSC");
The problem I have with this design is that if I ever add more departments to this building, I have to manually update this switch. So I tried a few things around this such as a dictionary, but it didn't seem to bind to a combo-box very well (even when implementing my own INotifyCollectionChanged).
So instead I created an interface that contains this information, for simplicity and length lets just say the interface does this:
public interface IDepartmentInfo
{
string DepartmentName { get; }
List<string> ActiveDirectoryGroups { get; }
string AdministrativeAssistant { get; }
string Floor { get; }
}
I then created a new class that implements this interface
public class SCSC : IDepartmentInfo
{
public string DepartmentName { get; } = "Shared Services";
public List<string> ActiveDirectoryGroups { get; } = new List<string>() {"Example_AD_GRP","Domain_Users"};
public string AdministrativeAssistant { get; } = "Lisa_Smith#outlook.com";
public string Floor { get; } = "5th Floor East";
public override string ToString() => DepartmentName;
}
Then, on my main Building Class I have an observable collection that expects an IDepartmentInfo and initializes those departments
public class CaneRidgeBuilding : IBuilding
{
public ObservableCollection<IDepartmentInfo> Departments { get; set; } = new ObservableCollection<IDepartmentInfo>() {new SCSC(), new ARS()};
public override string ToString()
{
return "CaneRidge";
}
}
On my View Model I implemented a few properties, mainly the BuildingSelectedIndex and the DepartmentSelectedIndex.
I also have an IDepartmentInfo property that notifies when it is changed because it is databound to several labels on my UI.
public class MainWindowViewModel : BindableBase
{
public ObservableCollection<IBuilding> Buildings { get; set; } = new ObservableCollection<IBuilding>() { new CaneRidgeBuilding() };
private ObservableCollection<IDepartmentInfo> _departmentInfos = new ObservableCollection<IDepartmentInfo>();
public ObservableCollection<IDepartmentInfo> DepartmentInfos
{
get { return _departmentInfos; }
set { SetProperty(ref _departmentInfos, value); }
}
private int _buildingIndex = -1;
public int BuildingIndex
{
get { return _buildingIndex; }
set
{
SetProperty(ref _buildingIndex, value);
SetDepartments();
}
}
private void SetDepartments()
{
if (BuildingIndex != -1)
DepartmentInfos = Buildings[BuildingIndex].Departments;
}
private int _departmentIndex = -1;
public int DepartmentIndex
{
get { return _departmentIndex; }
set
{
SetProperty(ref _departmentIndex, value);
LoadDepartmentSettings();
}
}
private IDepartmentInfo _departmentInformation;
public IDepartmentInfo DepartmentInformation
{
get { return _departmentInformation; }
set { SetProperty(ref _departmentInformation, value); }
}
private void LoadDepartmentSettings()
{
if (DepartmentIndex != -1)
DepartmentInformation = DepartmentInfos[DepartmentIndex];
}
private string _title = "Prism Application";
public string Title
{
get { return _title; }
set { SetProperty(ref _title, value); }
}
public MainWindowViewModel()
{
}
}
And it works exactly the way I want it to, however to problem I am running into now is how would I handle dependency injection? If I have 10 departments implementing IDepartmentInfo, how exactly could I pass this to an observable collection?
Because the moment I introduce a new building, if I tell Unity to resolve all IDepartmentInfos, what is going to happen is I'll get every single department even if it doesn't belong to CaneRidge.
If I split the departments to each building, then I run into issues where I can't easily load the departments into the ViewModel, because it is expecting an IDepartmentInfo collection. If I limited it to just one type of collection, then it wouldn't work.
Am I over-complicating things?

Here is an idea.
Custom attribute
Introduce a BuilingAttribute so each IDepartmentInfo implementation can declare Type of the building it belongs to (allow multiple if one department can belong to multiple buildings, I got the idea it can't).
[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Class, AllowMultiple = false)]
public class BuildingAttribute : Attribute
{
public Type BuildingType { get; private set; }
public BuildingAttribute(Type buildingType)
{
this.BuildingType = buildingType;
}
}
DepartmentInfo Collection Factory
An interface that knows how to create a collection of DepartmentInfo for each building Type.
public interface IDepartmentInfoCollectionFactory
{
void RegisterDepartment<T>(Func<IDepartmentInfo> departmentCreator) where T : class, IBuilding;
ObservableCollection<IDepartmentInfo> GetDepartments<T>() where T : class, IBuilding;
}
And the implementation (will be registered as singleton).
public class DepartmentInfoCollectionFactory : IDepartmentInfoCollectionFactory
{
private readonly Dictionary<Type, List<Func<IDepartmentInfo>>> departmentCreators =
new Dictionary<Type, List<Func<IDepartmentInfo>>>();
void IDepartmentInfoCollectionFactory.RegisterDepartment<T>(Func<IDepartmentInfo> departmentCreator)
{
Type buildingType = typeof(T);
if (!this.departmentCreators.ContainsKey(buildingType))
this.departmentCreators.Add(buildingType, new List<Func<IDepartmentInfo>>());
if (!this.departmentCreators[buildingType].Contains(departmentCreator))
this.departmentCreators[buildingType].Add(departmentCreator);
}
ObservableCollection<IDepartmentInfo> IDepartmentInfoCollectionFactory.GetDepartments<T>()
{
Type buildingType = typeof(T);
if (!this.departmentCreators.ContainsKey(buildingType))
throw new InvalidOperationException(
string.Format("No departments have been registered for {0}.", buildingType.ToString()));
ObservableCollection<IDepartmentInfo> departmentInfos = new ObservableCollection<IDepartmentInfo>();
foreach(Func<IDepartmentInfo> creator in this.departmentCreators[buildingType])
{
departmentInfos.Add(creator());
}
return departmentInfos;
}
}
Configuring the factory, so it knows how to create IDepartmentInfo collections.
protected override void ConfigureContainer()
{
Container.RegisterType<IDepartmentInfoCollectionFactory, DepartmentInfoCollectionFactory>(
new ContainerControlledLifetimeManager());
this.ConfigureDepartmentInfoCollectionFactory(Container.Resolve<IDepartmentInfoCollectionFactory>());
}
private void ConfigureDepartmentInfoCollectionFactory(IDepartmentInfoCollectionFactory factory)
{
// Types implementing IDepartmentInfo
var deptInfoTypes = AppDomain.CurrentDomain
.GetAssemblies()
.SelectMany(s => s.GetTypes())
.Where(t => typeof(IDepartmentInfo).IsAssignableFrom(t) && !t.IsInterface);
foreach(Type type in deptInfoTypes)
{
// Get collection of BuildingAttribute for the type
var buildingAttributes = type.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(BuildingAttribute), false)
.OfType<BuildingAttribute>();
if (buildingAttributes.Count() < 1)
throw new InvalidOperationException(
string.Format("The type {0} didn't declare BuildingArgument.", type.ToString()));
var buildingType = buildingAttributes.First().BuildingType;
if (buildingType == null || !buildingType.GetInterfaces().Contains(typeof(IBuilding)))
throw new InvalidOperationException(
string.Format("{0}: BuildingType is not an IBuilding.", type.ToString()));
var registerMethod = typeof(IDepartmentInfoCollectionFactory).GetMethod("RegisterDepartment")
.MakeGenericMethod(new Type[] { buildingType });
registerMethod.Invoke(factory, new object[]
{
new Func<IDepartmentInfo>(() => (IDepartmentInfo)Container.Resolve(type))
});
}
}
Inject the factory.
public class FooBuilding : IBuilding
{
private IDepartmentInfoCollectionFactory factory;
private readonly ObservableCollection<IDepartmentInfo> departmentInfos;
public string Name { get; } = "FooBuilding";
public ObservableCollection<IDepartmentInfo> DepartmentInfos
{
get { return this.departmentInfos; }
}
public FooBuilding(IDepartmentInfoCollectionFactory factory)
{
this.factory = factory;
this.departmentInfos = factory.GetDepartments<FooBuilding>();
}
}
Adding new department
It doesn't require any editing, just create new class with the attribute.
[Building(typeof(FooBuilding))]
public class BarDepartment : IDepartmentInfo
{
public string Name { get; } = "Bar department";
}

I was able to figure out how to inject different buildings and departments, probably not the best way
EDIT: Updated it to use reflection to make it less maintenance
protected override void ConfigureContainer()
{
base.ConfigureContainer();
Container.RegisterTypes(AllClasses.FromLoadedAssemblies()
.Where(type => typeof(IDepartment).IsAssignableFrom(type)), WithMappings.FromAllInterfaces, WithName.TypeName, WithLifetime.None);
ObservableCollection<IBuilding> Buildings = new ObservableCollection<IBuilding>()
{
Container.Resolve<Building1>(new ParameterOverride("departments",GetDepartmentCollection("Building1"))),
Container.Resolve<Building2>(new ParameterOverride("departments",GetDepartmentCollection("Building2")))
};
Container.RegisterInstance(typeof(ObservableCollection<IBuilding>), Buildings,
new ExternallyControlledLifetimeManager());
}
private ObservableCollection<IDepartment> GetDepartmentCollection(string buildingName)
{
var departments = new List<IDepartment>();
foreach (var registration in Container.Registrations.Where( s => s.MappedToType.Namespace.Contains(buildingName)))
{
departments.Add((IDepartment)Container.Resolve(registration.MappedToType));
}
return new ObservableCollection<IDepartment>(departments);
}
Now I am able to completely eliminate the enumeration and it can be extended in the future without breaking any code or requiring me to change anything.

Access properties of objects in an object

I have 3 classes MetaA, MetaB and MetaC. Each have a number of properties.
There are certain situations where it would be nice to just have one class that contains the properties of all three Meta classes, called for example, MetaComposite. In the composite class, I have tried creating and instance of each MetaA, B and C in the hope that I could access the properties like so:
Meta Composite mc = new MetaComposite();
mc.MetaA.Property1 = "Hello";
Since C# does not allow multiple inheritance, what is the best way of making a class that is a composite of other classes? I could put fields and write getters and setters in the composite class to pass on the property values, but this would be a lot of duplicated code.
What is the correct approach here?

How about creating interfaces for all three Meta classes and have the MetaComposite class implement all three of these interfaces. The MetaComposite class can instantiated the correct Meta class and call it to execute the desired property.
Here is an example:
public interface IMeta1
{
int Metaproperty1 {get; set;}
}
public interface IMeta2
{
int Metaproperty2 {get; set;}
}
public interface IMeta3
{
int Metaproperty3 {get; set;}
}
public class MetaComposite : IMeta1, IMeta2, IMeta3
{
private readonly Meta1 _meta1;
private readonly Meta2 _meta2;
private readonly Meta3 _meta3;
public MetaComposite()
{
_meta1 = new Meta1();
_meta2 = new Meta2();
_meta3 = new Meta3();
}
public int Property1
{
get { return _meta1.Property1; }
set { _meta1.Property1 = value; }
}
public int Property2
{
get { return _meta2.Property2; }
set { _meta2.Property2 = value; }
}
public int Property3
{
get { return _meta3.Property3; }
set { _meta3.Property3 = value; }
}
}

What is the reason to have all properties on class level?
Why not simply use exactly what you wrote?
class MetaComposite
{
public MetaAClass MetaA { get; private set; }
public MetaBClass MetaB { get; private set; }
public MetaCClass MetaC { get; private set; }
public MetaComposite()
{
MetaA = new MetaAClass();
MetaB = new MetaBClass();
MetaC = new MetaCClass();
}
}
public void Main()
{
var composite = new MetaComposite();
composite.MetaA.Field1 = 1;
composite.MetaB.Field2 = '2';
composite.MetaC.Field3 = new MetaDClass();
}

Reducing constructor boiler plate code

I often end up writing classes like this:
public class Animal
{
public string Colour { get; set; }
public int Weight { get; set; }
public Animal(Dog data)
{
this.Colour = data.Colour;
this.Weight = data.Weight;
}
public Animal(Cat data)
{
this.Colour = data.Colour;
this.Weight = data.Weight;
}
}
When you have lots of properties and types then you quickly end up with a lot of boiler plate code. Ideally in this situation I would just create an IAnimal interface and reference that. I'm currently in a situation where the Dog and Cat classes exist in a third party assembly and I can't modify them. The only solution that I can come up with is:
public class Animal
{
public string Colour { get; set; }
public int Weight { get; set; }
public Animal(Cat data){Init(data);}
public Animal(Dog data){Init(data);}
private void Init(dynamic data)
{
this.Colour = data.Colour;
this.Weight = data.Weight;
}
}
This works but I lose all type safety, is there a better solution than constructor injection?
Thanks,
Joe
EDIT: Here is a real world example. I have a third party library which returns 3 objects called:
GetPageByIdResult
GetPagesByParentIdResult
GetPagesByDateResult
(These are all auto generated classes from a service reference and the properties are pretty much identical)
Instead of dealing with these three objects I want to deal with a single PageData object or a collection of them.

You can have the logic in one common constructor that all the other constructors call:
public class Animal
{
public string Colour { get; set; }
public int Weight { get; set; }
public Animal(Dog data) : this (data.Colour, data.Weight)
{
}
public Animal(Cat data) : this (data.Colour, data.Weight)
{
}
private Animal(string colour, int weight)
{
this.Colour = colour;
this.Weight = weight;
}
}
This is pretty similar to your second solution but it doesn't lose type safety.

I'm currently in a situation where the Dog and Cat classes exist in a
third party assembly and I can't modify them
I'd suggest Automapper-based solution:
public static class AnimalFactory
{
public static Animal Create<T>(T source)
where T : class
{
Mapper.CreateMap<T, Animal>();
return Mapper.Map<Animal>(source);
}
}
Usage:
var catAnimal = AnimalFactory.Create(cat);
var dogAnimal = AnimalFactory.Create(dog);
Of course, you can provide a way to custom mapping configuration, if needed.

If you do not want to have the class littered like that you can try Extension methods?
public static Animal ToAnimal(this Dog item)
{
return new Animal() {Weight = item.Weight, Colour = item.Colour};
}
public static Animal ToAnimal(this Cat item)
{
return new Animal() {Weight = item.Weight, Colour = item.Colour};
}

try using json serializer's, with that we can ensure type safety.
public class Animal
{
public string Colour { get; set; }
public long Weight { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public Animal Create<T>(T anyType)
{
return GetObject<T, Animal>(anyType);
}
public K GetObject<T, K>(T type1)
{
try
{
var serialized = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(type1);
return JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<K>(serialized);
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
return default(K);
}
}
}
class Program
{
public static void Main(string[] args)
{
Animal obj = new Animal();
var animal = obj.Create(new { Colour = "Red", Weight = 100 });
//here you can pass any object, only same name properties will be initialized..
Console.WriteLine(animal.Colour + " : " + animal.Weight);
Console.ReadKey();
}
}

Trying to get a value from the Current Session when using properties

I am pretty new to C#, so please go easy on me.
I have a major issue that been holding me up for days.
Problem:
We have a web application and use MVC4, when a document is opened, all the values in the model are created in the backingstore in session , by calling the method SaveValues()
public class NotifyPropertyChangedBase : INotifyPropertyChanged
{
public Dictionary<string, object> BackingStore = new Dictionary<string, object>();
public Dictionary<string, object> Changes = new Dictionary<string, object>();
public bool HasChanges { get; set; }
public event PropertyChangedEventHandler PropertyChanged;
public void SaveValues()
{
// Expensive, to use reflection, especially if LOTS of objects are going to be used.
// You can use straight properties here if you want, this is just the lazy mans way.
this.GetType().GetProperties().ToList().ForEach(tProp => { BackingStore[tProp.Name] = tProp.GetValue(this, null); Changes[tProp.Name] = ""; });
HttpContext.Current.Session["SbackingStore"] = BackingStore;
HasChanges = false;
}
public void RevertValues()
{
// Again, you can use straight properties here if you want. Since this is using Property setters, will take care of Changes dictionary.
this.GetType().GetProperties().ToList().ForEach(tProp => tProp.SetValue(this, BackingStore[tProp.Name], null));
HasChanges = false;
}
public void OnPropertyChanged(string propName, object propValue)
{
// If you have any object types, make sure Equals is properly defined to check for correct uniqueness.
if (HttpContext.Current.Session["SbackingStore"] != null)
{
if (propValue == null) propValue = "";
BackingStore = (Dictionary<string, object>)HttpContext.Current.Session["SbackingStore"];
if (BackingStore[propName].Equals(propValue))
{ }
else
{
Changes[propName] = propValue;
HasChanges = true;
}
if (PropertyChanged != null)
PropertyChanged(this, new PropertyChangedEventArgs(propName));
}
}
}
}
I have a class setup like so , which contains ;
public class VisitViewModel : NotifyPropertyChangedBase
{
public Activity ActivityVM { get; set; }
public VBSSteps VBSStepsVM { get; set; }
public ProductTime ProductTimeVM { get; set; }
public OtherPST OtherPSTVM { get; set; }
public TimeRange TimeRangeVM { get; set; }
}
Each class that falls into the above VisitViewModel class and are coded like the below example. They inherit the NotifyPropertyChangedBase ( I will not post all the classes here as too much info ) ;
public class Activity : NotifyPropertyChangedBase
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string NotesID { get; set; }
public string SubID { get; set; }
public string Form { get; set; } // Form Name
private string _custNumber;
[MobileCRM.Resources.LocalizedString.LocalizedDisplayName("CustomerNumber")]
[DataType(DataType.Text)]
[Required]
public string CustNumber
{
get { return _custNumber; }
set { _custNumber = value; OnPropertyChanged("CustNumber", value); }
}
private string _companyName;
[MobileCRM.Resources.LocalizedString.LocalizedDisplayName("CustomerName")]
[DataType(DataType.Text)]
[Required]
public string CompanyName
{
get { return _companyName; }
set { _companyName = value; OnPropertyChanged("CompanyName", value); }
}
}
Now the issue is, the values that are created in the backing store ( session ) like the below ( when I expand any one of them i.e. ActivityVM, that contains the Keys and values I want. );
[0] {[ActivityVM, MobileCRM.Models.Activity]}
[1] {[VBSStepsVM, MobileCRM.Models.VBSSteps]}
[2] {[ProductTimeVM, MobileCRM.Models.ProdcutTime]}
[3] {[OtherPSTVM, MobileCRM.Models.OtherPST]}
[4] {[TimeRangeVM, MobileCRM.Models.TimeRange]}
[5] {[HasChanges, False]}
The problem with this is the code I use to get the values and compare the changed data, cannot find the value as they are stored as propertys.... can anybody suggest a way around this ?
Maybe when the values are saved, I could loop through each class and add all the values in each class to the backing store, therefore stopping the values being save as properties.
Code to get values from the backing store and perform the compare ( to see if the data has changed )
public void OnPropertyChanged(string propName, object propValue)
{
// If you have any object types, make sure Equals is properly defined to check for correct uniqueness.
if (HttpContext.Current.Session["SbackingStore"] != null)
{
if (propValue == null) propValue = "";
BackingStore = (Dictionary<string, object>)HttpContext.Current.Session["SbackingStore"];
if (BackingStore[propName].Equals(propValue)) // Errors here : gives The given key was not present in the dictionary.

You have this code:
public void SaveValues()
{
// Expensive, to use reflection, especially if LOTS of objects are going to be used.
// You can use straight properties here if you want, this is just the lazy mans way.
this.GetType().GetProperties().ToList().ForEach(tProp => { BackingStore[tProp.Name] = tProp.GetValue(this, null); Changes[tProp.Name] = ""; });
HttpContext.Current.Session["SbackingStore"] = BackingStore;
HasChanges = false;
}
All clases inherit the base class with this method. So whenever you call SaveValues method on any of your derived classes the HttpContext.Current.Session["SbackingStore"] get ovveriden with new backingstore, that is why you get "A key is missing in dictionary".

What data structure is appropriate for this?

Within code I want to do something like this:
item.Stage = Stage.Values.ONE;
Where Stage.Values.ONE represents some predefined Stage:
public class Stage
{
[Key]
public virtual int StageId { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public TimeSpan Span { get; set; }
}
I'm dealing with EF CodeFirst... and I have a lot of stages to define. I'm not sure if I should store the data in the database, or in the dbContext, or what, but I'm looking for the simplest implementation.
I've tried this:
I've tried the following (defining two constants):
public class Stage
{
[Key]
public virtual int StageId { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public TimeSpan Span { get; set; }
public static class Values
{
public static readonly Stage ONE = new Stage()
{
StageId = 0,
Name = "ONE",
Span = new TimeSpan(0, 0, 0)
};
public static readonly Stage TWO = new Stage()
{
StageId = 1,
Name = "TWO",
Span = new TimeSpan(0, 0, 10)
};
}
But whenever I create a new instance of an entity that has a Stage, a new Stage is added to the db. I just need a few constant stages.
Use of Stage:
public class Side
{
public Side()
{
Stage = Stage.Values.ONE; // Adds new Stage to DB, when it should be a reference to the one I defined above
}
public virtual Stage Stage { get; set; }
}

It looks a bit like an enum, and I've used a kind of 'extended enum' patter several times before with some success. Because you're refencing these values in code, it may not make sense to store them in the database as well, but it's possible if needed.
The technique is described in detail here: http://lostechies.com/jimmybogard/2008/08/12/enumeration-classes/
Basically, you create a base class which provides a number of services similar to an enum, and then to create your "enumerated class" you inherit from it and provide a bunch of static instances which call the constructor with however many properties you need to have.
To avoid link rot, here is the base class to use (just put the whole class into your project somewhere), and scroll down for your own code.
public abstract class Enumeration : IComparable
{
private readonly int _value;
private readonly string _displayName;
protected Enumeration()
{
}
protected Enumeration(int value, string displayName)
{
_value = value;
_displayName = displayName;
}
public int Value
{
get { return _value; }
}
public string DisplayName
{
get { return _displayName; }
}
public override string ToString()
{
return DisplayName;
}
public static IEnumerable<T> GetAll<T>() where T : Enumeration, new()
{
var type = typeof(T);
var fields = type.GetFields(BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Static | BindingFlags.DeclaredOnly);
foreach (var info in fields)
{
var instance = new T();
var locatedValue = info.GetValue(instance) as T;
if (locatedValue != null)
{
yield return locatedValue;
}
}
}
public override bool Equals(object obj)
{
var otherValue = obj as Enumeration;
if (otherValue == null)
{
return false;
}
var typeMatches = GetType().Equals(obj.GetType());
var valueMatches = _value.Equals(otherValue.Value);
return typeMatches && valueMatches;
}
public override int GetHashCode()
{
return _value.GetHashCode();
}
public static int AbsoluteDifference(Enumeration firstValue, Enumeration secondValue)
{
var absoluteDifference = Math.Abs(firstValue.Value - secondValue.Value);
return absoluteDifference;
}
public static T FromValue<T>(int value) where T : Enumeration, new()
{
var matchingItem = parse<T, int>(value, "value", item => item.Value == value);
return matchingItem;
}
public static T FromDisplayName<T>(string displayName) where T : Enumeration, new()
{
var matchingItem = parse<T, string>(displayName, "display name", item => item.DisplayName == displayName);
return matchingItem;
}
private static T parse<T, K>(K value, string description, Func<T, bool> predicate) where T : Enumeration, new()
{
var matchingItem = GetAll<T>().FirstOrDefault(predicate);
if (matchingItem == null)
{
var message = string.Format("'{0}' is not a valid {1} in {2}", value, description, typeof(T));
throw new ApplicationException(message);
}
return matchingItem;
}
public int CompareTo(object other)
{
return Value.CompareTo(((Enumeration)other).Value);
}
}
And now your code will look something like this:
public class Stage : Enumeration
{
public TimeSpan TimeSpan { get; private set; }
public static readonly Stage One
= new Stage (1, "Stage one", new TimeSpan(5));
public static readonly Stage Two
= new Stage (2, "Stage two", new TimeSpan(10));
public static readonly Stage Three
= new Stage (3, "Stage three", new TimeSpan(15));
private EmployeeType() { }
private EmployeeType(int value, string displayName, TimeSpan span) : base(value, displayName)
{
TimeSpan = span;
}
}
Once you have that set up, you can just store the .Value in the database. I'm afraid I haven't done it in EF, but in nHibernate it's reasonably straight-forward to tell a property to just store the ".Value" of the property, and you can wire it back up when you load the value by having it call:
Stage.FromValue<Stage>(intValue);

Hold the Stage as a property of your entity, use it the way you're doing and add
Ignore(x => x.Stage)
to your mapping. This will ignore this property when mapping to your database.
Edit: I misinterpreted the question.
If you want just the different stages in your database, you should put the stages in their own table with an ID, and refer to that ID trough a relationship. Every entity will hold an additional reference and you'll have to define relationships for them.
Is this what you were looking for?