Delegate the property display name translation to a handler - asp.net-mvc-4

Current code in model:
[Display(Name = "E-mail")]
public string EMail { get; set; }
Desired code:
public string EMail { get; set; }
I would like to delegate the translation to a handler, something like this:
if(propertyName == "EMail") return "E-mail"

Based on my understanding of your question, I'm assuming that you are trying to implement localisation in your application.
If so, there are two options;
Resources
In .NET you can add Resource (.resx) files into your application to handle translation (one resx for each language). Then you can specify the Resource by specifying the ResourceType property of your Display attribute. For example;
public class Model
{
[Display(Name = "Email", ResourceType = typeof(Resources.Strings))]
public string Email { get; set; }
}
Custom attribute
Alternatively, if you are set on implementing this in a handler then you could implement a custom attribute, as demonstrated in this question.
Edit: Modified from the example in the above post.
If you add a new Resource file to your project - say Strings.resx and add "HelloWorld" as a field. You can then create a new attribute, such as LocalisedDisplayNameAttribute;
public class LocalisedDisplayNameAttribute : DisplayNameAttribute
{
public LocalisedDisplayNameAttribute(string resourceId)
: base(GetMessageFromResource(resourceId))
{
}
private static string GetMessageFromResource(string resourceId)
{
// "Strings" is the name of your resource file.
ResourceManager resourceManager = Strings.ResourceManager;
return resourceManager.GetString(resourceId);
}
}
You can then use it as follows;
public class Model
{
[LocalisedDisplayName("HelloWorld")]
public string Email { get; set; }
}
Let me know if I can help further,
Matt

Related

How to bind a collection with objects?

I need to bind a collection of objects from a querystring, but I cannot find the proper querystring format.
My controller code:
public class Filter
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Operator { get; set; }
public object Value { get; set; }
}
public void Get(IEnumerable<Filter> filters)
{
....
}
If you do want to pass the objects with querystring you could try as below:
https://localhost:44389/Test/Index?filters[0].Name=n1&filters[1].Name=n2&filters[2].Name=n3&filters[2].Value=v3
The result:
the offcial document related:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/mvc/models/model-binding?view=aspnetcore-6.0#collections
but i don't think it's a good solution,because the length of Url is limited,if your model has plenty properties and your collection has many elements ,you may get some error

.NET CORE API: Is it possible to conditionally validate a model depending on the http verb used to submit it?

I'm very new to the FluentValidation and I'd like to validate my model in different ways depending on which verb was used to submit it.
Given a very simple class, I'd like to ignore the ID property on a POST but ensure it's been provided on a PUT. Is this something the FluentValidation can do?
public class CategoryModel
{
public int ID { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Description { get; set; }
}
I'm guessing I have to get the HttpContext over to the validators so I can determine the http method used, but I don't want to re-invent the wheel if there's already a built-in way.
Thanks!!
I think I've come up with a solution by passing the context to my validator. However, if something looks wrong or out of place, please let me know.
public class CategoryModel
{
public int ID { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Description { get; set; }
}
public class CategoryModelValidator : AbstractValidator<CategoryModel>
{
public CategoryModelValidator(IHttpContextAccessor context)
{
if (context.HttpContext.Request.Method == HttpMethods.Post)
RuleFor(x => x.ID).Empty();
if (context.HttpContext.Request.Method == HttpMethods.Put)
RuleFor(x => x.ID).NotEmpty();
RuleFor(x => x.Name).Length(1, 30);
}
}
Passing the context was easier than I thought. All I had to do was register it in my ConfigureServices method with services.AddHttpContextAccessor() and DI takes care of the rest.
To be honest, this is a pretty handy validation tool

Automapper not mapping between two objects (which are virtually the same for all intents and purposes)

Yes, this is ANOTHER "Automapper not mapping" question. Either something broke or I'm going the stupid way about it. I'm building a webapp with ASP.NET Core 2.1 using AutoMapper 3.2.0 (latest stable release at the time) though I have tested with 3.1.0 with no luck either.
Question
Simple object to be mapped to another. For the sake of testing and trials, these are now EXACTLY the same, yet still automapper gives:
AutoMapperMappingException: Missing type map configuration or unsupported mapping.
Mapping types:
NotificationModel -> NotificationViewModel
ProjectName.Models.Dashboard.NotificationModel -> ProjectName.Models.Dashboard.NotificationViewModel
The strange thing is, I have previously mapped this model set 7 ways to sunday in the Startup.cs file with the only thing changing is my facial expression. Other maps work as indicated using similar, if not the same code for them.
The Models
NotificationModel.cs
public class NotificationModel
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Content { get; set; }
public DateTime CreateTS { get; set; }
public bool FlagRead { get; set; }
public bool FlagSticky { get; set; }
public bool FlagReceipt { get; set; }
public string ReceiptContact { get; set; }
public string UserId { get; set; }
public bool CANCELLED { get; set; }
}
NotificationViewModel.cs
public class NotificationViewModel
{
public int Id { get; set; }
//Reminder, this model has been amended to exactly represent that of the original model for testing purposes.
public string Content { get; set; }
public DateTime CreateTS { get; set; }
public bool FlagRead { get; set; }
public bool FlagSticky { get; set; }
public bool FlagReceipt { get; set; }
public string ReceiptContact { get; set; }
public string UserId { get; set; }
public bool CANCELLED { get; set; }
}
Startup & Automapper Config
Mapper.Initialize(cfg =>
{
// Some other mappings removed for clarity.
cfg.CreateMap<GroupViewModel, GroupModel>().ReverseMap();
//cfg.CreateMap<EntityViewModel, EntityModel>().ReverseMap().ForAllOtherMembers(opt => opt.Ignore());
cfg.CreateMap<NotificationModel, NotificationViewModel>().ForAllMembers(opt => opt.Ignore());
cfg.CreateMap(typeof(NotificationViewModel), typeof(NotificationModel));
//I even left out the .ReverseMap, for testing purposes.
});
Mapper.AssertConfigurationIsValid();
Usage
NotificationViewModel test = _mapper.Map<NotificationViewModel>(item); << Which is where I receive the exception.
Other Attempts
Ok, so I've been through some more articles explaining different things and subsequently tried the following respectively:
cfg.CreateMap(typeof(NotificationModel), typeof(NotificationViewModel));
cfg.CreateMap<NotificationModel, NotificationViewModel>().ReverseMap().ForAllMembers(opt => opt.Ignore());
cfg.CreateMap<NotificationModel, NotificationViewModel>().ForAllOtherMembers(opt => opt.Ignore());
Along with:
NotificationViewModel test = _mapper.Map<NotificationViewModel>(item);
_mapper.Map(item, typeof(NotificationViewModel), typeof(NotificationModel));
NotificationViewModel existingDestinationObject = new NotificationViewModel();
_mapper.Map<NotificationModel, NotificationViewModel>(item, existingDestinationObject);
I've tried amending the .Map()/.Map<> usage several ways, none of which seemed to yield anything but an exception about not having been configured.
So short of manually writing a conversion for this object (which is simple enough for its purpose), I am in dire need of a solution here. If not to use, then atleast to learn from and help others facing the same.
UPDATE
IT WORKS!
Scanning through the project, I noticed that somewhere in previous documentation - I read about creating a type of "config" class that just inherits from an abstract class called Profile. In this class you will also be able to define your maps, yet what is strange is that I am not able to drop this class and simply use the config maps setup in my Startup.cs file. Automapper will refuse to hold any maps that are not defined in this separate class. The below seems to get me what I need, however I still need an explanation as to why Automapper doesn't function as desired without it:
public class AMConfig : Profile
{
public AMConfig()
{
CreateMap<ManageUserModel, IndexViewModel>();
CreateMap<IndexViewModel, ManageUserModel>();
CreateMap<NotificationViewModel, NotificationModel>().ReverseMap();
CreateMap<List<NotificationViewModel>, List<NotificationModel>>().ReverseMap();
CreateMap<TaskViewModel, TaskModel>().ReverseMap();
}
}
Thanks!
Scanning through the project, I noticed that somewhere in previous documentation - I read about creating a type of "config" class that just inherits from an abstract class called Profile. In this class you will also be able to define your maps, yet what is strange is that I am not able to drop this class and simply use the config maps setup in my Startup.cs file. Automapper will refuse to hold any maps that are not defined in this separate class. The below seems to get me what I need, however I still need an explanation as to why Automapper doesn't function as desired without it:
public class AMConfig : Profile
{
public AMConfig()
{
CreateMap<ManageUserModel, IndexViewModel>();
CreateMap<IndexViewModel, ManageUserModel>();
CreateMap<NotificationViewModel, NotificationModel>().ReverseMap();
CreateMap<List<NotificationViewModel>, List<NotificationModel>>().ReverseMap();
CreateMap<TaskViewModel, TaskModel>().ReverseMap();
}
}

Sorting on nested Id property

Let's say we have a document like this
public class Event
{
public string Id { get; set; }
public EntityDescriptor Venue { get; set; }
// Other properties omitted for simplicity
}
public class EntityDescriptor
{
public string Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
}
And an index like this
public class Events : AbstractIndexCreationTask<Event>
{
public Events()
{
Map = items => from e in items
select new
{
Venue_Id = e.Venue.Id,
Venue_Name = e.Venue.Name
};
}
}
When trying to sort on Event.Venue.Id
session.Query<Event, Events>().Take(10).OrderBy(e => e.Venue.Id).ToArray();
the sent request is
/indexes/Events?&pageSize=10&sort=__document_id&SortHint-__document_id=String
Is this by design or a bug?
PS: OrderBy(e => e.Venue.Name) works as expected (sort=Venue_Name).
It's not a bug. __document_id is the special known field containing the ID of the document. It's there regardless of whether you have an .Id property.
edit
I misread your question. This indeed appears to be a bug. I recommend you send a simple repro case to the Raven forum and let them know which RavenDB version you're using.

this[propertyName] is not a function in breeze.debug.js

I am using Hot towel template and extended functionality of it by using breeze. I have used breeze.partial-entities.js file to conver breeze entities to proper dtos that can be used by knockout observables as shown below.
function dtoToEntityMapper(dto) {
var keyValue = dto[keyName];
var entity = manager.getEntityByKey(entityName, keyValue);
if (!entity) {
// We don't have it, so create it as a partial
extendWith = $.extend({ }, extendWith || defaultExtension);
extendWith[keyName] = keyValue;
entity = manager.createEntity(entityName, extendWith);
}
mapToEntity(entity, dto);
entity.entityAspect.setUnchanged();
return entity;
}
For few of the entities it is working properly and getting breeze data converted to entities but for one of the entity implementation is failing. Model for the same is given as below.
public class StandardResourceProperty
{
[Key]
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public int StandardResourceId{ get; set; }
public int InputTypeId{ get; set; }
public int ListGroupId{ get; set; }
public string Format{ get; set; }
public string Calculation{ get; set; }
public bool Required{ get; set; }
public int MinSize{ get; set; }
public int MaxSize{ get; set; }
public string DefaultValue{ get; set; }
public string Comment { get; set; }
public virtual StandardResource AssociatedStandardResource { get; set; }
public virtual List AssociatedList { get; set; }
}
The error i am getting is
TypeError: this[propertyName] is not a function
[Break On This Error]
thispropertyName;
breeze.debug.js (line 13157)
]
with code
proto.setProperty = function(propertyName, value) {
this[propertyName](value);
// allow set property chaining.
return this;
};
Please let me know . What can be possible issue with the implementation also , it would be great if i can get more suggestion on how to debug and trace such issues.
Let's back up. I do not understand what you mean by "convert breeze entities to proper dtos that can be used by knockout observables". Breeze entities are already configured as KO observables (assuming you are using the default Breeze model library configuration). What are you trying to do?
I suspect you are following along with the Code Camper Jumpstart course where it does a getSessionPartials projection query. That query (like all projections) returns DTOs - not entities - and maps them with the dtoToEntityMapper method into Session entities.
The CCJS dtoToEntityMapper method cannot be used with entities. It is for converting from a DTO to an Entity and takes DTOs - not entities - as input.
Goodbye to dtoEntityMapper
The dtoToEntityMapper method pre-dates the ability of Breeze to automate projection-to-entity mapping by adding .toType('StandardResourceProperty') to your projection query.
Here is what the CCJS getSessionPartials query could look like now:
var query = EntityQuery
.from('Sessions')
.select('id, title, code, speakerId, trackId, timeSlotId, roomId, level, tags')
.orderBy(orderBy.session)
.toType('Session');
If you go this way, be sure to set the default state of the isPartial flag to true in the custom constructor (see model.js)
metadataStore.registerEntityTypeCtor(
'Session', function () { this.isPartial = true; }, sessionInitializer);
Note that this.isPartial = true is the reverse of the CCJS example where the default was false.
Make sure that you set isPartial(false) when you query or create a full entity. In CCJS there are two places to do that: in the success-callback of getSessionById AND in createSession which would become:
var createSession = function () {
return manager.createEntity(entityNames.session, {isPartial: false});
};