I've got quite weird problem... Here is what it is... When I'm comparing data from somoe goverment service and checking that last born child in my base is the same like in data from service, after updating parent lastBornChild is loosing connection to parent id and it's updated in db wiht ParentId as NULL.
I know that this code should be written better but I wonder why ef changing my lastBornChild.ParentId to NULL.
public class MyService : IMyService
{
MyService(DataDbContext context)
{
_context = context;
}
private DateTime FindYoungestChild(int parentId)
{
var lastChild = _context.Childs.Where(i => i.Parent.Id == parentId).OrderByDescending(d => d.BirthDate).FirstOrDefault();
if (lastChild == null)
return DateTime.MinValue;
else
return lastChild .BirthDate;
}
public Parent UpdateFamilyHistory(Parent parent)
{
DateTime lastStatusTransDate = FindYoungestChild(parent.Id);
var childs= new List<Child>();
var updateChildList = <some goverment public service response>(d => d.DateTimeCreated > lastStatusTransDate).ToList();
foreach (var item in updateChildList)
{
var newChild = new Child
{
Name = item.Name,
BirthDate = item.BirthDate;
};
childs.Add(newChild );
}
parent.Childs = childs;
_context.Update(parent);
_context.SaveChanges();
return parent;
}
}
Try this:
var childs = new List<Child>();
foreach (var item in updateChildList)
{
var newChild = new Child
{
ParentId = parent.Id,
Name = item.Name,
BirthDate = item.BirthDate
};
childs.Add(newChild);
}
_context.Childs.AddRange(childs);
_context.SaveChanges();
I have more then one property I need to grab, that starts with the same prefix but I can only get the exact value by key for ModelBindingContext.ValueProvider. Is there a way to grab multiple ValueProviders or iterate the System.Web.Mvc.DictionaryValueProvider<object>?
var value = bindingContext.ValueProvider.GetValue(propertyDescriptor.Name);
The reason for doing this is a dynamic property called Settings which will bind to json properties below. Right now there is no property called "Enable" on Settings so it doesnt bind normally.
public class Integration
{
public dynamic Settings {get;set;}
}
"Integrations[0].Settings.Enable": "true"
"Integrations[0].Settings.Name": "Will"
Got it
public class DynamicPropertyBinder : PropertyBinderAttribute
{
public override bool BindProperty(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext, PropertyDescriptor propertyDescriptor)
{
if (propertyDescriptor.PropertyType == typeof(Object))
{
foreach(var valueProvider in bindingContext.ValueProvider as System.Collections.IList)
{
var dictionary = valueProvider as DictionaryValueProvider<object>;
if (dictionary != null)
{
var keys = dictionary.GetKeysFromPrefix($"{bindingContext.ModelName}.{propertyDescriptor.Name}");
if (keys.Any())
{
var expando = new ExpandoObject();
foreach (var key in keys)
{
var keyValue = dictionary.GetValue(key.Value);
if (keyValue != null)
{
AddProperty(expando, key.Key, keyValue.RawValue);
}
}
propertyDescriptor.SetValue(bindingContext.Model, expando);
return true;
}
}
}
}
return false;
}
public static void AddProperty(ExpandoObject expando, string propertyName, object propertyValue)
{
var expandoDict = expando as IDictionary<string, object>;
if (expandoDict.ContainsKey(propertyName))
expandoDict[propertyName] = propertyValue;
else
expandoDict.Add(propertyName, propertyValue);
}
}
This is an old question, but I will post the solution that I've found.
You can get all submitted keys from the request object, and then iterating over them get the actual values:
var keys = controllerContext.RequestContext.HttpContext.Request.Form.AllKeys.ToList();
foreach (var key in keys)
{
var value = bindingContext.ValueProvider.GetValue(key).AttemptedValue;
}
How can I apply a behavior to all interface in a specific namespace?
I know how to apply a behavior to a concrete interface like IMyBlFacade,
but I don't want to do that for all interfaces separately, but in one shot.
Is implementing a ICallHandler obsolete when using custom IInterfaceBehaviors?
As I understand both build up a pipeline for interception.
What is the benefit of using ootb callhandlers and custom callhandlers over IInterfacebehaviors?
I don't want it to be like this:
unity.RegisterType<IMyService, MyService>(
new ContainerControlledLifetimeManager(),
new Interceptor<InterfaceInterceptor>(),
new InterceptionBehavior<OutputInterceptionBehavior>());
rather like this (pseudo code):
unity.addInterceptor<InterfaceInterceptor>()
.addMachingRule<namespace>("mynamespace")
.addBehaviors(...);
So it is partly possible using Unity's RegistrationByConvention.
As far as I have understood, you can only do simple mappings.
For more complex mappings, for example using various InjectionMembers, you have to map them manually.
You have to inherit from RegistrationConvention to build your own convention implementation.
public class UnityRegistrationByConventions : RegistrationConvention
{
private readonly IUnityContainer _container;
List<string> _assemblyNameFilter;
List<string> _namespaceFilterForClasses;
public UnityRegistrationByConventions(IUnityContainer container, List<string> assemblyNameFilter = null, List<string> namespaceFilterForClasses = null)
{
_container = container;
_assemblyNameFilter = assemblyNameFilter;
_namespaceFilterForClasses = namespaceFilterForClasses;
}
public override Func<Type, IEnumerable<Type>> GetFromTypes()
{
return WithMappings.FromMatchingInterface;
}
public override Func<Type, IEnumerable<InjectionMember>> GetInjectionMembers()
{
return (t => new List<InjectionMember>(){
new Interceptor<InterfaceInterceptor>(),
new InterceptionBehavior<LoggingInterceptionBehavior>(), // 1
new InterceptionBehavior<ExceptionInterceptionBehavior>(), // 2
new InterceptionBehavior<CachingInterceptionBehavior>(), // 3
new InterceptionBehavior<ValidationInterceptionBehavior>()} as IEnumerable<InjectionMember>);
}
public override Func<Type, LifetimeManager> GetLifetimeManager()
{
return t => WithLifetime.Transient(t);
}
public override Func<Type, string> GetName()
{
return (type => (this._container.Registrations.Select(x => x.RegisteredType)
.Any(r => type.GetInterfaces().Contains(r) == true) == true) ? WithName.TypeName(type) : WithName.Default(type));
}
public override IEnumerable<Type> GetTypes()
{
var allAssemblies = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.GetAssemblies().Where(a => _assemblyNameFilter.Contains(a.FullName.Split(',')[0]));
List<Type> allClasses = new List<Type>();
foreach (var assembly in allAssemblies)
{
var classArray = assembly.GetTypes().Where(t => t.IsPublic &&
!t.IsAbstract &&
t.IsClass == true &&
_namespaceFilterForClasses.Contains(t.Namespace));
if (classArray != null && classArray.Count() > 0)
allClasses.AddRange(classArray);
}
return allClasses;
}
}
and apply the convention like this
var rby = new UnityRegistrationByConventions(unityContainer, assFilter, classNamespaceFilter);
I want to automate the Setup code by a given array containing expected result and parameters.
Something like data driven setup.
My existing code:
var mock = new Mock<ILogin>();
var testDataTable = new object[,]
{
{ LoginResult.Success, "Jack", "123!##"}
, { LoginResult.WrongPassword, "Jack", "123321"}
, { LoginResult.NoSuchUser, "Peter", "123!##"}
};
// ForEachRow is my own extension method
testDataTable.ForEachRow((row) =>
{
var result = (LoginResult)row[0];
var username = (string)row[1];
var password = (string)row[2];
mock.Setup(o => o.Login(
It.Is<string>(u => u == username),
It.Is<string>(p => p == password)
)).Returns(result);
});
return mock.Object;
Code that I wish:
var mock = new Mock<ILogin>();
new object[,]
{
{ LoginResult.Success, "Jack", "123!##"}
, { LoginResult.WrongPassword, "Jack", "123321"}
, { LoginResult.NoSuchUser, "Peter", "123!##"}
}.ForEachRow((row) =>
{
var exprTree = (ILogin o)=>o.Login("ANY", "ANY");
AutoSetup(mock, exprTree, row); // <---- How to write this AutoSetup?
});
return mock.Object;
How to write the AutoSetup(mock, exprTree, dataArray) function above?
It takes three parameters:
mock: A mock object, e.g. new Mock()
exprTree: Expression tree that represents a method to be setup
dataArray: An object[], the 0 element is the expected result, and others are parameters that passed to the method
This was an interesting challenge. I think I have a working implementation for your AutoSetup method, using the expressions API. If anyone has a simpler solution, I'd love to see it.
static void AutoSetup<TMock, TResult>(Mock<TMock> mock, Expression<Func<TMock, TResult>> exprTree, object[] items) where TMock : class
{
var methodCallExpr = exprTree.Body as MethodCallExpression;
var arguments = items.Skip(1).Select(o => Expression.Constant(o));
var updatedMethod = methodCallExpr.Update(methodCallExpr.Object, arguments);
var updatedLambda = exprTree.Update(updatedMethod, exprTree.Parameters);
mock.Setup(updatedLambda).Returns((TResult)items[0]);
}
Here is a full working test as a console app, with an implementation of ForEachRow, which you didn't provide.
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var login = SetUp();
Console.WriteLine(login.Login("Jack", "123!##"));
Console.WriteLine(login.Login("Jack", "123321"));
Console.WriteLine(login.Login("Peter", "123!##"));
Console.ReadKey();
}
static ILogin SetUp()
{
var mock = new Mock<ILogin>(MockBehavior.Strict);
var rows = new object[,]
{
{ LoginResult.Success, "Jack", "123!##" },
{ LoginResult.WrongPassword, "Jack", "123321" },
{ LoginResult.NoSuchUser, "Peter", "123!##" }
};
rows.ForEachRow((row) => AutoSetup(mock, (ILogin l) => l.Login("ANY", "ANY"), row));
return mock.Object;
}
private static void AutoSetup<TMock, TResult>(Mock<TMock> mock, Expression<Func<TMock, TResult>> exprTree, object[] items) where TMock : class
{
var methodCallExpr = exprTree.Body as MethodCallExpression;
var arguments = items.Skip(1).Select(o => Expression.Constant(o));
var updatedMethod = methodCallExpr.Update(methodCallExpr.Object, arguments);
var updatedLambda = exprTree.Update(updatedMethod, exprTree.Parameters);
mock.Setup(updatedLambda).Returns((TResult)items[0]);
}
}
public static class ArrayExtensions
{
public static void ForEachRow<T>(this T[,] rows, Action<T[]> action)
{
var x = rows.GetLength(1);
var y = rows.GetLength(0);
for (int i = 0; i < y; i++)
{
var row = new T[x];
for (int j = 0; j < x; j++)
{
row[j] = rows[i, j];
}
action(row);
}
}
}
public interface ILogin
{
LoginResult Login(string p1, string p2);
}
public enum LoginResult
{
Success,
WrongPassword,
NoSuchUser
}
EDIT: You asked in a comment about how to take advantage of the variable parameter matching that Moq provides with the It.IsAny<> method. Because what you pass to your Mock.Setup() is an expression tree, it's able to scan the method parameters and implement special behaviour for any that are calls to It.IsAny<>. However, if you use It.IsAny<> in your test data array, by the time we retrieve it from your items array to set in on the expression, it's not a method call but simply the result of the call it It.IsAny<> which is default(T) (see here).
We need some way of specifying in your test data array that the parameter should be any. Then we can check for this special case and generate the correct MethodCallExpression representing a call to It.IsAny<>.
Here are the changes I made to support this:
Add an Any type to use in your test data
public class Any<T>
{
private Any() { }
public static Any<T> Param { get { return new Any<T>(); } }
}
Update the AutoSetup method to handle this special case:
private static void AutoSetup<TMock, TResult>(Mock<TMock> mock, Expression<Func<TMock, TResult>> exprTree, object[] items) where TMock : class
{
var arguments = items.Skip(1).Select(o => {
var type = o.GetType();
if (type.IsGenericType && type.GetGenericTypeDefinition() == typeof(Any<>))
{
var typeParameter = type.GetGenericArguments();
var genericItIsAny = typeof(It).GetMethod("IsAny");
var itIsAny = genericItIsAny.MakeGenericMethod(typeParameter);
return Expression.Call(itIsAny) as Expression;
}
return Expression.Constant(o);
});
var methodCallExpr = exprTree.Body as MethodCallExpression;
var updatedMethod = methodCallExpr.Update(methodCallExpr.Object, arguments);
var updatedLambda = exprTree.Update(updatedMethod, exprTree.Parameters);
mock.Setup(updatedLambda).Returns((TResult)items[0]);
}
In the test data, use the Any type
{ LoginResult.Success, "NoPasswordUser", Any<string>.Param }
Depending on how you're storing your test data, you might need another way of identifying parameters that you want to be variable (specially formatted string?), but in general this should give you an idea about how to create the correct expressions.
Consider following code:
My problem is:
1) I can't seem to cast the errors to HttpContent
2) I can't use the CreateContent extension method as this doesn't exist on the context.Response.Content.CreateContent
The example here only seems to provide StringContent and I'd like to be able to pass the content as a JsobObject:
http://www.asp.net/web-api/overview/web-api-routing-and-actions/exception-handling
public class ServiceLayerExceptionFilter : ExceptionFilterAttribute
{
public override void OnException(HttpActionExecutedContext context)
{
if (context.Response == null)
{
var exception = context.Exception as ModelValidationException;
if ( exception != null )
{
var modelState = new ModelStateDictionary();
modelState.AddModelError(exception.Key, exception.Description);
var errors = modelState.SelectMany(x => x.Value.Errors).Select(x => x.ErrorMessage);
// Cannot cast errors to HttpContent??
// var resp = new HttpResponseMessage(HttpStatusCode.BadRequest) {Content = errors};
// throw new HttpResponseException(resp);
// Cannot create response from extension method??
//context.Response.Content.CreateContent
}
else
{
context.Response = new HttpResponseMessage(context.Exception.ConvertToHttpStatus());
}
}
base.OnException(context);
}
}
context.Response = new HttpResponseMessage(context.Exception.ConvertToHttpStatus());
context.Response.Content = new StringContent("Hello World");
you also have the possibility to use the CreateResponse (added in RC to replace the generic HttpResponseMessage<T> class that no longer exists) method if you want to pass complex objects:
context.Response = context.Request.CreateResponse(
context.Exception.ConvertToHttpStatus(),
new MyViewModel { Foo = "bar" }
);