I am new to AutoFixture so I hope you can help. How do you set some properties in an object but leave others as the AutoFixture default - while using XUnit's [Theory] attribute and an AutoDataAttribute.
For example, in the contrived Airport example below based on Jason Robert's Pluralsight course, when setting the property (or the Airport object) e.g.
f.Customize<Mock<IAirport>>(c => c.Do(m => m.SetupGet(i => i.code).Returns("NOO")));
the other properties are often null, or I have to manually set them rather than letting AutoFixture do it. I would prefer to have cleaner code where the fixtureFactory sets all the properties for the Airport so that the V2 unit test only passed in a single Airport parameter.
So, within the fixtureFactory
How do you set MULTIPLE properties?
How does one use the default AutoFixture values rather than leaving the uninitialized values as
null?
Thanks!
using AutoFixture;
using AutoFixture.AutoMoq;
using AutoFixture.Xunit2;
using Moq;
using System;
using Xunit;
namespace AirportTesterWithAutoFixture
{
public interface IAirport
{
string city { get; set; }
string code { get; set; }
string country { get; set; }
string name { get; set; }
void CallAirTrafficControl();
}
public class Airport : IAirport
{
public string name { get; set; }
public string city { get; set; }
public string code { get; set; }
public string country { get; set; }
public Airport()
{
}
public Airport(string name, string code, string country, string city)
{
this.name = name;
this.code = code;
this.country = country;
this.city = city;
}
public void CallAirTrafficControl()
{
if (this.country.Equals("Canada") && this.code.StartsWith("Y"))
{
// Send "Bonjour!"();
}
else
{
throw new Exception("Invalid code for Canada");
}
}
}
public class UnitTest1
{
[Fact]
public void V1_Validate_ExceptionThrown_ForInvalidCanadianAirportCode()
{
var fixture = new Fixture();
var sut = fixture.Create<Airport>();
// Overwrite code and country with invalid setting for Canada.
sut.country = "Canada";
sut.code = "NOT";
Assert.ThrowsAny<Exception>(() => sut.CallAirTrafficControl());
}
[Theory]
[AutoMoqInvalidAirportDataAttribute]
public void V2_Validate_ExceptionThrown_ForInvalidCanadianAirportCode(IAirport sut, string name, string city)
{
Airport airport = new Airport(name, sut.code, sut.country, city);
Assert.ThrowsAny<Exception>(() => airport.CallAirTrafficControl());
}
}
// https://stackoverflow.com/questions/58998834/how-to-use-ifixture-buildt-with-automoqcustomization-when-t-is-an-interface
public class AutoMoqInvalidAirportDataAttribute : AutoDataAttribute
{
public static Func<IFixture> fixtureFactory = () =>
{
IFixture f = new Fixture().Customize(new AutoMoqCustomization());
f.RepeatCount = 5;
// How do you set MULTIPLE properties?
// How does one use the default AutoFixture values rather than leaving the uninitialized values as null?
// Can one pass a custom property used earlier in the Fixture creation process to another custom property used later?
f.Customize<Mock<IAirport>>(c => c.Do(m => m.SetupGet(i => i.code).Returns("NOT")));
return f;
};
public AutoMoqInvalidAirportDataAttribute() : base(fixtureFactory)
{
}
}
}
AutoFixture does not populate mock properties by default, but it can be done. These blog posts describe how to do it:
https://blog.ploeh.dk/2013/04/05/how-to-configure-automoq-to-set-up-all-properties/
https://blog.ploeh.dk/2013/04/08/how-to-automatically-populate-properties-with-automoq/
Author of AutoFixture does not recommend this approach, however, as he considers declaration of properties in interfaces a design smell.
I could not find the original discussion about this topic unfortunately, but it is hidden somewhere on StackOverflow in the comments. Maybe you will be able to find it if you go through Mark Seemann's profile.
Related
We have some configuration files which were generated by serializing C# objects with Json.net.
We'd like to migrate one property of the serialised class away from being a simple enum property into a class property.
One easy way to do this, would be to leave the old enum property on the class, and arrange for Json.net to read this property when we load the config, but not to save it again when we next serialize the object. We'll deal with generating the new class from the old enum separately.
Is there any simple way to mark (e.g. with attributes) a property of a C# object, so that Json.net will ignore it ONLY when serializing, but attend to it when deserializing?
There are actually several fairly simple approaches you can use to achieve the result you want.
Let's assume, for example, that you have your classes currently defined like this:
class Config
{
public Fizz ObsoleteSetting { get; set; }
public Bang ReplacementSetting { get; set; }
}
enum Fizz { Alpha, Beta, Gamma }
class Bang
{
public string Value { get; set; }
}
And you want to do this:
string json = #"{ ""ObsoleteSetting"" : ""Gamma"" }";
// deserialize
Config config = JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<Config>(json);
// migrate
config.ReplacementSetting =
new Bang { Value = config.ObsoleteSetting.ToString() };
// serialize
json = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(config);
Console.WriteLine(json);
To get this:
{"ReplacementSetting":{"Value":"Gamma"}}
Approach 1: Add a ShouldSerialize method
Json.NET has the ability to conditionally serialize properties by looking for corresponding ShouldSerialize methods in the class.
To use this feature, add a boolean ShouldSerializeBlah() method to your class where Blah is replaced with the name of the property that you do not want to serialize. Make the implementation of this method always return false.
class Config
{
public Fizz ObsoleteSetting { get; set; }
public Bang ReplacementSetting { get; set; }
public bool ShouldSerializeObsoleteSetting()
{
return false;
}
}
Note: if you like this approach but you don't want to muddy up the public interface of your class by introducing a ShouldSerialize method, you can use an IContractResolver to do the same thing programmatically. See Conditional Property Serialization in the documentation.
Approach 2: Manipulate the JSON with JObjects
Instead of using JsonConvert.SerializeObject to do the serialization, load the config object into a JObject, then simply remove the unwanted property from the JSON before writing it out. It's just a couple of extra lines of code.
JObject jo = JObject.FromObject(config);
// remove the "ObsoleteSetting" JProperty from its parent
jo["ObsoleteSetting"].Parent.Remove();
json = jo.ToString();
Approach 3: Clever (ab)use of attributes
Apply a [JsonIgnore] attribute to the property that you do not want to be serialized.
Add an alternate, private property setter to the class with the same type as the original property. Make the implementation of that property set the original property.
Apply a [JsonProperty] attribute to the alternate setter, giving it the same JSON name as the original property.
Here is the revised Config class:
class Config
{
[JsonIgnore]
public Fizz ObsoleteSetting { get; set; }
[JsonProperty("ObsoleteSetting")]
private Fizz ObsoleteSettingAlternateSetter
{
// get is intentionally omitted here
set { ObsoleteSetting = value; }
}
public Bang ReplacementSetting { get; set; }
}
For any situation where it's acceptable to have your deserialization-only property be marked internal, there's a remarkably simple solution that doesn't depend on attributes at all. Simply mark the property as internal get, but public set:
public class JsonTest {
public string SomeProperty { internal get; set; }
}
This results in correct deserialization using default settings/resolvers/etc., but the property is stripped from serialized output.
I like sticking with attributes on this one, here is the method I use when needing to deserialize a property but not serialize it or vice versa.
STEP 1 - Create the custom attribute
public class JsonIgnoreSerializationAttribute : Attribute { }
STEP 2 - Create a custom Contract Reslover
class JsonPropertiesResolver : DefaultContractResolver
{
protected override List<MemberInfo> GetSerializableMembers(Type objectType)
{
//Return properties that do NOT have the JsonIgnoreSerializationAttribute
return objectType.GetProperties()
.Where(pi => !Attribute.IsDefined(pi, typeof(JsonIgnoreSerializationAttribute)))
.ToList<MemberInfo>();
}
}
STEP 3 - Add attribute where serialization is not needed but deserialization is
[JsonIgnoreSerialization]
public string Prop1 { get; set; } //Will be skipped when serialized
[JsonIgnoreSerialization]
public string Prop2 { get; set; } //Also will be skipped when serialized
public string Prop3 { get; set; } //Will not be skipped when serialized
STEP 4 - Use it
var sweet = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(myObj, new JsonSerializerSettings { ContractResolver = new JsonPropertiesResolver() });
Hope this helps! Also it's worth noting that this will also ignore the properties when Deserialization happens, when I am derserializing I just use the converter in the conventional way.
JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<MyType>(myString);
Use setter property:
[JsonProperty(nameof(IgnoreOnSerializing))]
public string IgnoreOnSerializingSetter { set { _ignoreOnSerializing = value; } }
[JsonIgnore]
private string _ignoreOnSerializing;
[JsonIgnore]
public string IgnoreOnSerializing
{
get { return this._ignoreOnSerializing; }
set { this._ignoreOnSerializing = value; }
}
Hope this help.
After i spent a quite long time searching how to flag a class property to be De-Serializable and NOT Serializable i found that there's no such thing to do that at all; so i came up with a solution that combines two different libraries or serialization techniques (System.Runtime.Serialization.Json & Newtonsoft.Json) and it worked for me like the following:
flag all your class and sub-classes as "DataContract".
flag all the properties of your class and sub-classes as "DataMember".
flag all the properties of your class and sub-classes as "JsonProperty" except those you want them not to be serialized.
now flag the properties the you do NOT want it to be serialized as "JsonIgnore".
then Serialize using "Newtonsoft.Json.JsonConvert.SerializeObject" and De-Serialize using "System.Runtime.Serialization.Json.DataContractJsonSerializer".
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using Newtonsoft.Json;
using System.Runtime.Serialization;
using System.IO;
using System.Runtime.Serialization.Json;
using System.Text;
namespace LUM_Win.model
{
[DataContract]
public class User
{
public User() { }
public User(String JSONObject)
{
MemoryStream stream = new MemoryStream(Encoding.Unicode.GetBytes(JSONObject));
DataContractJsonSerializer dataContractJsonSerializer = new DataContractJsonSerializer(typeof(User));
User user = (User)dataContractJsonSerializer.ReadObject(stream);
this.ID = user.ID;
this.Country = user.Country;
this.FirstName = user.FirstName;
this.LastName = user.LastName;
this.Nickname = user.Nickname;
this.PhoneNumber = user.PhoneNumber;
this.DisplayPicture = user.DisplayPicture;
this.IsRegistred = user.IsRegistred;
this.IsConfirmed = user.IsConfirmed;
this.VerificationCode = user.VerificationCode;
this.Meetings = user.Meetings;
}
[DataMember(Name = "_id")]
[JsonProperty(PropertyName = "_id")]
public String ID { get; set; }
[DataMember(Name = "country")]
[JsonProperty(PropertyName = "country")]
public String Country { get; set; }
[DataMember(Name = "firstname")]
[JsonProperty(PropertyName = "firstname")]
public String FirstName { get; set; }
[DataMember(Name = "lastname")]
[JsonProperty(PropertyName = "lastname")]
public String LastName { get; set; }
[DataMember(Name = "nickname")]
[JsonProperty(PropertyName = "nickname")]
public String Nickname { get; set; }
[DataMember(Name = "number")]
[JsonProperty(PropertyName = "number")]
public String PhoneNumber { get; set; }
[DataMember(Name = "thumbnail")]
[JsonProperty(PropertyName = "thumbnail")]
public String DisplayPicture { get; set; }
[DataMember(Name = "registered")]
[JsonProperty(PropertyName = "registered")]
public bool IsRegistred { get; set; }
[DataMember(Name = "confirmed")]
[JsonProperty(PropertyName = "confirmed")]
public bool IsConfirmed { get; set; }
[JsonIgnore]
[DataMember(Name = "verification_code")]
public String VerificationCode { get; set; }
[JsonIgnore]
[DataMember(Name = "meeting_ids")]
public List<Meeting> Meetings { get; set; }
public String toJSONString()
{
return JsonConvert.SerializeObject(this, new JsonSerializerSettings() { NullValueHandling = NullValueHandling.Ignore });
}
}
}
Hope that helps ...
Depending on where in the application this takes place and if it's just one property, one manual way you can do this is by setting the property value to null and then on the model you can specify that the property be ignored if the value is null:
[JsonProperty(NullValueHandling = NullValue.Ignore)]
public string MyProperty { get; set; }
If you are working on an ASP.NET Core web app, you can globally set this for all properties in all models by setting this in your Startup.cs file:
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services) {
// other configuration here
services.AddMvc()
.AddJsonOptions(options => options.SerializerSettings.NullValueHandling = NullValueHandling.Ignore);
}
with reference to #ThoHo's solution, using the setter is actually all that is needed, with no additional tags.
For me I previously had a single reference Id, that I wanted to load and add to the new collection of reference Ids. By changing the definition of the reference Id to only contain a setter method, which added the value to the new collection. Json can't write the value back if the Property doesn't have a get; method.
// Old property that I want to read from Json, but never write again. No getter.
public Guid RefId { set { RefIds.Add(value); } }
// New property that will be in use from now on. Both setter and getter.
public ICollection<Guid> RefIds { get; set; }
This class is now backwards compatible with the previous version and only saves the RefIds for the new versions.
To build upon Tho Ho's answer, this can also be used for fields.
[JsonProperty(nameof(IgnoreOnSerializing))]
public string IgnoreOnSerializingSetter { set { IgnoreOnSerializing = value; } }
[JsonIgnore]
public string IgnoreOnSerializing;
If you use JsonConvert,IgnoreDataMemberAttribute is ok.My standard library not refrence Newton.Json,and I use [IgnoreDataMember] to control object serialize.
From Newton.net help document.
Is there any simple way to mark (e.g. with attributes) a property of a C# object, so that Json.net will ignore it ONLY when serializing, but attend to it when deserializing?
The easiest way I've found as of this writing is to include this logic in your IContractResolver.
Sample code from above link copied here for posterity:
public class Employee
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public Employee Manager { get; set; }
public bool ShouldSerializeManager()
{
// don't serialize the Manager property if an employee is their own manager
return (Manager != this);
}
}
public class ShouldSerializeContractResolver : DefaultContractResolver
{
public new static readonly ShouldSerializeContractResolver Instance = new ShouldSerializeContractResolver();
protected override JsonProperty CreateProperty(MemberInfo member, MemberSerialization memberSerialization)
{
JsonProperty property = base.CreateProperty(member, memberSerialization);
if (property.DeclaringType == typeof(Employee) && property.PropertyName == "Manager")
{
property.ShouldSerialize =
instance =>
{
Employee e = (Employee)instance;
return e.Manager != e;
};
}
return property;
}
}
All of the answers are good but this approach seemed like the cleanest way. I actually implemented this by looking for an attribute on the property for SkipSerialize and SkipDeserialize so you can just mark up any class you control. Great question!
Jraco11's answer is very neat. In case, if you want to use the same IContractResolver both for serialization and deserialization, then you can use the following:
public class JsonPropertiesResolver : DefaultContractResolver
{
protected override JsonProperty CreateProperty(MemberInfo member, MemberSerialization memberSerialization)
{
JsonProperty property = base.CreateProperty(member, memberSerialization);
if (member.IsDefined(typeof(JsonIgnoreSerializationAttribute)))
{
property.ShouldSerialize = instance => false;
}
return property;
}
}
thats will do the trick, create a property with set only
example 1:
https://dotnetfiddle.net/IxMXcG
[JsonProperty("disabled-protections")]
public JArray DisabledProtections { set => IsPartialResult = (value != null && value.HasValues); }
public bool IsPartialResult { get; private set; }
example 2:
private JArray _disabledProtections;
[JsonProperty("disabled-protections")]
public JArray DisabledProtections { set => _disabledProtections = value; }
public bool IsPartialResult => _disabledProtections != null && _disabledProtections.HasValues;
Use [JsonIgnore] attribute in the public property of the model class.
I have the following Mapping configurations:-
Initialized Data:-
private static IEnumerable<Source> InitializeData()
{
var source= new[]
{
new Source("John", "Doe", "1111111111"),
new Source("Jack", "Handsome", "2222222222"),
new Source("Joe", "Mackenze", "3333333333")
};
return source;
}
Source Model:
public class Source
{
private string First { get; set; }
private string Last { get; set; }
private string Phone { get; set; }
public Source(string first, string last, string phone)
{
First = first;
Last = last;
Phone = phone;
}
}
Destination Model
public class Destination
{
public string First { get; set; }
public string Last { get; set; }
public string Phone { get; set; }
}
Main
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var config = new MapperConfiguration(cfg =>
{
cfg.AllowNullCollections = true;
cfg.CreateMap<Source, Destination>().ReverseMap();
});
var mapper = new Mapper(config);
var source= InitializeData();
var people = mapper.Map<IEnumerable<Destination>>(source);
foreach (var p in people)
{
Console.WriteLine("Name: {0}-{1} Phone: {2}", p.First, p.Last, p.Phone);
}
Console.ReadLine();
}
Problem descriptions:
I have been struggled to understand the AutoMapper mapping between source and destination models.
My source model has a constructor to initialize or accept data from outside. It works fine when I removed the source constructor from the model that's mean flat mapping works fine but constructor initialization has the issue. When I debug in VS2019, it shows the number of records but all fields are empty/null.
What is wrong with the above mapping. I have gone through the AutoMapper reference docs but do not get a hold on this issue.
I highly appreciate your help!
Try calling AssertConfigurationIsValid. Check http://docs.automapper.org/en/latest/Configuration-validation.html.
Your Source properties are private. I assume you meant public.
First of all, this is not exactly a duplication of the dozens of other posts and I have tried all of them and none of them work.
I have a model that contains many more values than my web api consumers need.
public class Publication
{
[Key]
public int PublicationID { get; set; }
public string PublicationTitle { get; set; }
public string Frequency { get; set; }
public DateTime NextIssueDate { get; set; }
public DateTime SpaceDeadline { get; set; }
public DateTime MaterialsDeadline { get; set; }
public DateTime CreatedDt { get; set; }
public string CreatedBy { get; set; }
public DateTime UpdatedDt { get; set; }
public string UpdatedBy { get; set; }
}
I only want say a few of the fields to be passed in the API. I've tried this code but instead of leaving out say UpdateBy in the Json result, it returns it with a null value. How do I get rid of that? I've tried several dozen variations but they either fail to compile or fail to return results.
public IQueryable<Publication> GetPublications()
{
return db.Publications
.ToList()
.Select(p => new Publication {
PublicationID = p.PublicationID,
PublicationTitle = p.PublicationTitle,
Frequency = p.Frequency,
NextIssueDate = p.NextIssueDate
})
.AsQueryable();
}
Don't serialize your DAO. Create a complete contract and then serialize it selectively. To creating different contracts for different cases, you could simplify it using Json.Net; you could just create a custom contract resolver and use it as a parameter of SerializeObject() like so
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var person = new TestContract {FirstName = "John", LastName = "Doe", Age = 36};
var firstNameContract = new SelectiveSerializer("firstname");
var allPropertiesContract = new SelectiveSerializer("firstname, lastname, age");
var allJson = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(
person,
Formatting.Indented,
new JsonSerializerSettings {ContractResolver = allPropertiesContract});
var firstNameJson = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(
person,
Formatting.Indented,
new JsonSerializerSettings {ContractResolver = firstNameContract});
Console.WriteLine(allJson);
// {
// "FirstName": "John",
// "LastName": "Doe",
// "Age": 36
// }
Console.WriteLine(firstNameJson);
// {
// "FirstName": "John",
// }
}
public class SelectiveSerializer : DefaultContractResolver
{
private readonly string[] _fields;
public SelectiveSerializer(string fields)
{
var fieldColl = fields.Split(',');
_fields = fieldColl
.Select(f => f.ToLower().Trim())
.ToArray();
}
protected override JsonProperty CreateProperty(MemberInfo member, MemberSerialization memberSerialization)
{
var property = base.CreateProperty(member, memberSerialization);
property.ShouldSerialize = o => _fields.Contains(member.Name.ToLower());
return property;
}
}
public class TestContract
{
public string FirstName { get; set; }
public string LastName { get; set; }
public int Age { get; set; }
}
Without much effort, you could probably work this into your default mediatype formatter (in the pipeline) to look for a parameter in the request called 'fields' or whatever and then use the custom contract resolver if present, and then it would be seamless default behavior to limit fields if specified or serialize the entire object if not specified.
On the academic side, here is the justification:
Any modification to the data is considered a "view concern" which means, in an API, it should controlled by query parameters and accept header. In this case, the "representation" of the data is application/json and you've chose to "filter" the returned fields. All of this can (and should be, imo) be handled during serialization. So your "model" in this case will always be the full model vs. some subset of the model. The full model in this example contains first name, last name, and age. In reality, this could be hundreds of properties. If you want to allow the client to choose a subset of the complete model, this is how you could do it with selective serialization.
You can similar behaviors in graph apis. There, the default for large models is that you get an empty object if you don't specify fields, forcing the client to be very specific about what it asks for, which is great when payload size matters (e.g. mobile applications). And, there's nothing stopping from creating field presets like 'name' which could mean 'firstname, lastname' or 'all' which includes all properties.
I've never been a fan of having hundreds of data objects that all serve some ad hoc requirement for a data set that is used in 20 different contexts where some cases require more data while others require less. IMO if you have to go through the same process to get the data, whether it complete or not, you shouldn't waste your time creating additional objects to frame the data for the sake of the client, and this should help you achieve that.
It's because you're returning a collection of Publication objects so you will get every property that is contained in that class, whether you populate it or not. If you want to return a subset of the properties then create a class that has only the properties you want to return and create an instance of that class in your query.
public IQueryable<WhatIReallyWantToReturn> GetPublications()
{
return db.Publications
.ToList()
.Select(p => new WhatIReallyWantToReturn {
PublicationID = p.PublicationID,
PublicationTitle = p.PublicationTitle,
Frequency = p.Frequency,
NextIssueDate = p.NextIssueDate
})
.AsQueryable();
}
private class WhatIReallyWantToReturn
{
public int PublicationID { get; set; }
public string PublicationTitle { get; set; }
public string Frequency { get; set; }
public DateTime NextIssueDate { get; set; }
}
using Newtonsoft.Json;
public class Publication
{
[Key]
public int PublicationID { get; set; }
public string PublicationTitle { get; set; }
public string Frequency { get; set; }
public DateTime NextIssueDate { get; set; }
public DateTime SpaceDeadline { get; set; }
public DateTime MaterialsDeadline { get; set; }
[JsonIgnore]
public DateTime CreatedDt { get; set; }
[JsonIgnore]
public string CreatedBy { get; set; }
[JsonIgnore]
public DateTime UpdatedDt { get; set; }
[JsonIgnore]
public string UpdatedBy { get; set; }
}
as Craig W. said you can use viewmodel ,also you can use anonymous type
(notice viewmodel is better way because you can use some utilities like automapper for mapping your property automatically)
JsonIgnore annotation has worked for me
[JsonIgnore]
public int Ranking { get; set; }
Here is a great article (Dec 2019) on the subject. It offers a solution for data shaping by making use of ExpandoObject and Type Reflection. The properties that the client requires can then be passed through the request as a query parameter (i.e. separated by a comma). The article also offers solution to the JSON Serialization problem.
Startup.cs file:
services.AddControllers(config =>
{
config.RespectBrowserAcceptHeader = true;
config.ReturnHttpNotAcceptable = true;
})
.AddXmlDataContractSerializerFormatters()
.AddNewtonsoftJson();
+1 for Sinaesthetic's answer.
I just finished reading an article, about GraphQL which solves exactly this problem. You can define exactly which fields do you need in the same request. No need for creating new endpoints every single time, when the caller needs just a specific subset of the properties.
If you can do this in .NET WEB API too without creating new models and endpoints, with just a very little extra effort, why wouldn't you (instead of exchanging Web Api for GraphQL).
Actually his SelectiveSerializer could be upgarded with reflection, so if you want to define which props you need in
C#, you can do this by providing property expressions, so you don't have to worry about misstyping prop names.
I bet there are other solutions for this, but the basic concept is the most important that we can define which fields we need in our json without creating new models.
I need to restrict the values that I return to my page in a web method without using some sort of proxy object.
Let's say I have a Car class with the following class
public class Car
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Engine { get; set; }
}
and a webmethod which looks like;
[WebMethod]
public static List<Car> SearchCars(string search)
{
var cars = car.All().Where(x => x.name.StartsWith(search));
return cars.ToList();
}
The list that get's return to my page has all attributes. How can I exclude say .. the engine attribute so only ID and Name are return?
The above is a purely fictional example, in the real world I'm using Subsonic3 objects to return a list etc.
You can use a projection to select only the fields you want returned. Something like this:
[WebMethod]
public static List<Car> SearchCars(string search)
{
var cars = car.All().Where(x => x.name.StartsWith(search)).Select(x => new { x.Id, x.Name });
return cars.ToList();
}
I have a bit of a twist that is a little more trouble than I thought it would be. Normally I would have an InArgument and use it as below:
public InArgument<Int32> XYZ_ID { get; set; }
public InArgument<Int32> XYZ_COUNT { get; set; }
protected override IAsyncResult BeginExecute(...)
{
....snip....
_ABC_ID = XYZ_ID.Get(context),
_ABC_Count = XYZ_COUNT.Get(context)
This works great and I thought a custom object we be close to the same process but I can't seem to figure it out. ActvUsrPrgmResults is just a class of properties such as AccountName, FirstName etc. So I passed it in like any other type.
public InArgument<bool> IsHappy { get; set; }
public InArgument<bool> IsClapping { get; set; }
public InArgument<ActvUsrPrgmResults> itm_ActvUsrPrgm { get; set; }
Accessing it though is a bit more difficult....for me.
protected override void Execute(CodeActivityContext context)
{
NewPerson x = new NewPerson
{
AccountName = this.itm_ActvUsrPrgm.Get(?????
//this doesn't work either
AccountName = itm_ActvUsrPrgm.?????
In other words I can't see how to access the properties of the itm_ActvUsrPrgm InArgument.
Thank You for any help or direction
JB
Additional Info
I have this CodeActivity in a ForEach (List). So each item in the generic collection is a single instance of ActvUsrPrgmResults. So I hand this off to my CodeActivity thinking I will have a handle to manipulate that item's data????
Interesting
Now based upon Will's comments I got to thinking about this slight of hand. It works but shouldn't there be a more elegant approach?
public InArgument<bool> IsHappy { get; set; }
public InArgument<bool> IsClapping { get; set; }
public InArgument<ActvUsrPrgmResults> itm_ActvUsrPrgm { get; set; }
protected override void Execute(CodeActivityContext context)
{
ActvUsrPrgmResults y = itm_ActvUsrPrgm.Get(context);
NewPerson x = new NewPerson
{
AccountName = y.AccountName....
The problem is me, myself, and I. I wasn't getting a handle on the object being passed in. For some under the covers reason an "InArgument" is not immediately accessible until you get a firm grasp on the exact object from the given context. I don't know for sure but I suspect this is due to multiple workflows running so you can't just grab any ole object ytou must get the object from the proper context. Anyway here are my comments of what I learned inline.
public InArgument<bool> IsHappy { get; set; } //bool variable being passed in
public InArgument<bool> IsClapping { get; set; } //bool variable being passed in
public InArgument<ActvUsrPrgmResults> itm_ActvUsrPrgm { get; set; } //custom object being passed in
protected override void Execute(CodeActivityContext context)
{
bool Happy = context.GetValue(this.IsHappy);
bool Clap = context.GetValue_this.IsClapping);
ActvUsrPrgmResults y = context.GetValue(this.itm_ActvUsrPrgm);
//NOW!!! we have a handle to the proper objects for this context
//This also works. I just flip flopped the InArgument property and the context.
ActvUsrPrgmResults y = itm_ActvUsrPrgm.Get(context);
NewPerson x = new NewPerson
{
AccountName = y.AccountName....