Serialising classes that implement List<T> for transferring over WCF - wcf

I have spent some time writing code for my application assuming that the serialisation bit would be the easiest part of it. Pretty much both sides (client and server) are done and all I need to do is passing a class AccountInfo from the service to the client... The problem is that AccountInfo inherits List and therefore [DataContract] attribute is not valid. I tried using the [CollectionDataContract] attribute but then the class that is received on the other side (client) contains only generic List methods without my custom implemented properties such as GroupTitle...I have worked out a solution for this problem but I don't know how to apply it.
Basically everything works when I make a property instead of inheriting a List but then I can't bind this class to LongListSelector (WP7) because it's not a collection type.
There are three classes I'm on about. AccountInfo that contains multiple instances of: AccountInfoGroup that contains multiple instances of:AccountInfoEntry (this one does not inherit list therefore there are no problems serialising it and all properties are accessible).
Could someone help me using right attributes to serialise and transfer these classes using a WCF method?
Here is the code of 2 of these collection classes:
public class AccountInfo : List<AccountInfoGroup>
{
public AccountInfo()
{
UpdateTime = DateTime.UtcNow;
EntryID = Guid.NewGuid();
}
public bool HasItems
{
get
{
return (Count != 0);
}
private set
{
}
}
public Guid EntryID
{
get;
set;
}
public decimal GetTotalCredit()
{
decimal credit = 0;
foreach (AccountInfoGroup acg in this.Where(item => item.Class == AccountInfoEntry.EntryType.Credit))
{
acg.Where(item => item.ItemClass == AccountInfoEntry.EntryType.Credit).ToList().ForEach(entry =>
{ credit += entry.Remaining; }
);
}
return credit;
}
public bool UsedForCreditComparison = false;
public DateTime UpdateTime { get; private set; }
}
public class AccountInfoGroup : List<AccountInfoEntry>
{
public AccountInfoEntry.EntryType Class
{
get;
private set;
}
public string Title
{
get
{
return AccountInfoEntry.ClassToString(Class);
}
}
public AccountInfoGroup(AccountInfoEntry.EntryType groupClass)
{
this.#Class = groupClass;
}
public bool HasItems
{
get
{
return (Count != 0);
}
private set
{
}
}
}
Thank you for any suggestions... :)

The sample you had is quite painful for WCF in serialization.
What I suggest is you to revised and have a common models for your WCF messages (That means it only contains properties with getter and setter, serialization attributes).
If you have a problem in LongListSelector binding in WP7, you might want to convert the message to the actual type the WP7 object supports to use in binding.

Related

ASPNET Core ActionResult property not serialize

I have this object
[DataContract]
public class FilterList<T> : List<T>
{
[DataMember]
public int Total { get; set; }
}
In my controller:
public ActionResult<FilterList<MyPOCO>> GetFilteredResult(string filter)
{
var l = new FilterList<MyPOCO>();
l.Total = 123456;
// Continue to add many MyPOCO objects into the list
return l;
}
I can get back the MyPOCO list at the client side, but the l.Total is NOT serialize. May I know what I had done wrongly?
Here is a workaround , you could try to use [JsonObject] attribute . But the items will not be serialized, because a JSON container can have properties, or items -- but not both. If you want both, you will need to add a synthetic list property to hold the items.
[JsonObject] will also cause base class properties such as Capacity to be serialized, which you likely do not want. To suppress base class properties, use MemberSerialization.OptIn. Thus your final class should look something like:
[JsonObject(MemberSerialization = MemberSerialization.OptIn)]
public class FilterList<T> : List<T>
{
[JsonProperty]
public int Total { get; set; }
[JsonProperty]
List<T> Items
{
get
{
return this.ToList();
}
set
{
if (value != null)
this.AddRange(value);
}
}
}
Result:

Why model binding with a struct doesn't work?

I'm trying to understand why this binding doesn't work.
The binding didn't work until I changed the type from struct to class.
Is this by design or am I missing something?
I'm using asp.net core 2.2 MVC
View Models
Not working
public class SettingsUpdateModel
{
public DeviceSettingsStruct DeviceSettings { get; set; }
}
Working
public class SettingsUpdateModel
{
public DeviceSettingsClass DeviceSettings { get; set; }
}
public class DeviceSettingsClass
{
public bool OutOfScheduleAlert { get; set; }
// other fields removed for brevity
}
public struct DeviceSettingsStruct
{
public bool OutOfScheduleAlert { get; set; }
// other fields removed for brevity
}
Controller
[HttpPost]
public IActionResult Update(SettingsUpdateModel newSettings)
{
// newSettings.DeviceSettings.OutOfScheduleAlert always false on struct but correct on class
return Index(null);
}
View
<input class="form-check-input" type="checkbox" id="out_of_schedule_checkbox" asp-for="DeviceSettings.OutOfScheduleAlert">
Expected: DeviceSettings.OutOfScheduleAlert to bind to a struct the same as class
Actual: only the class parameter was binded
It is by design in complex type model bindings. A struct type is a value type that is typically used to encapsulate small groups of related variables, such as the coordinates of a rectangle or the characteristics of an item in an inventory.
In ComplexTypeModelBinder.cs , the CanUpdateReadOnlyProperty method will mark the properties of value-type model as readonly due to value types have copy-by-value semantics, which prevents us from updating
internal static bool CanUpdatePropertyInternal(ModelMetadata propertyMetadata)
{
return !propertyMetadata.IsReadOnly || CanUpdateReadOnlyProperty(propertyMetadata.ModelType);
}
private static bool CanUpdateReadOnlyProperty(Type propertyType)
{
// Value types have copy-by-value semantics, which prevents us from updating
// properties that are marked readonly.
if (propertyType.GetTypeInfo().IsValueType)
{
return false;
}
// Arrays are strange beasts since their contents are mutable but their sizes aren't.
// Therefore we shouldn't even try to update these. Further reading:
// http://blogs.msdn.com/ericlippert/archive/2008/09/22/arrays-considered-somewhat-harmful.aspx
if (propertyType.IsArray)
{
return false;
}
// Special-case known immutable reference types
if (propertyType == typeof(string))
{
return false;
}
return true;
}
Reference here for more details .
BTY ,if you want to bind struct type model , you could try to send the json data by using ajax request from the view.

Return Entity Framework objects over WCF

We have a problem concerning Entity Framework objects and sending them through WCF.
We have a database, and Entity Framework created classes from that database, a 'Wallet' class in this particular situation.
We try to transfer a Wallet using this code:
public Wallet getWallet()
{
Wallet w = new Wallet();
w.name = "myname";
w.walletID = 123;
return w;
}
We need to transfer that Wallet class, but it won't work, we always encounter the same exception:
"An error occurred while receiving the HTTP response to localhost:8860/ComplementaryCoins.svc. This could be due to the service endpoint binding not using the HTTP protocol. This could also be due to an HTTP request context being aborted by the server (possibly due to the service shutting down). See server logs for more details."
We searched on the internet, and there is a possibility that the error is due to the need of serialization of Entity Framework-objects.
We have absolutely no idea if this could be the case, and if this is the case, how to solve it.
Our DataContract looks like this (very simple):
[DataContract]
public partial class Wallet
{
[DataMember]
public int getwalletID { get { return walletID; } }
[DataMember]
public string getname { get { return name; } }
}
Does anyone ever encountered this problem?
EDIT: Our Entity Framework created class looks like this:
namespace ComplementaryCoins
{
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
public partial class Wallet
{
public Wallet()
{
this.Transaction = new HashSet<Transaction>();
this.Transaction1 = new HashSet<Transaction>();
this.User_Wallet = new HashSet<User_Wallet>();
this.Wallet_Item = new HashSet<Wallet_Item>();
}
public int walletID { get; set; }
public string name { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<Transaction> Transaction { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<Transaction> Transaction1 { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<User_Wallet> User_Wallet { get; set; }
public virtual ICollection<Wallet_Item> Wallet_Item { get; set; }
}
}
Thanks for helping us.
I had the same problem some time ago and the solution for this was:
The entity framework was returning a serialized class instead of normal class.
eg. Wallet_asfawfklnaewfklawlfkawlfjlwfejlkef instead of Wallet
To solve that you can add this code:
base.Configuration.ProxyCreationEnabled = false;
in your Context file.
Since the context file is auto generated you can add it in the Context.tt
In the Context.tt file it can be added around lines 55-65:
<#=Accessibility.ForType(container)#> partial class <#=code.Escape(container)#> : DbContext
{
public <#=code.Escape(container)#>()
: base("name=<#=container.Name#>")
{
base.Configuration.ProxyCreationEnabled = false;
<#
if (!loader.IsLazyLoadingEnabled(container))
{
#>
this.Configuration.LazyLoadingEnabled = false;
<#
Try specifying a setter for the properties, something like this :
[DataContract]
public partial class Wallet
{
[DataMember]
public int getwalletID { get { return walletID; } set { } }
[DataMember]
public string getname { get { return name; } set { } }
}
If it still doesn't work, you may consider creating an intermediate POCO class for this purpose, and use mapper library like AutoMapper or ValueInjecter to transfer the data from the EF objects.
The POCO class should have same properties as your EF class :
[DataContract]
public class WalletDTO
{
[DataMember]
public int walletID { get; set; }
[DataMember]
public string name { get; set; }
}
And modify your method to return this class instead :
public WalletDTO getWallet()
{
Wallet w = new Wallet(); // or get it from db using EF
var dto = new WalletDTO();
//assuming we are using ValueInjecter, this code below will transfer all matched properties from w to dto
dto.InjectFrom(w);
return dto;
}
Are you trying to recieve a IEnumerable<Wallets>? If - yes, please modify your server class that returns the IEnumerable by adding .ToArray() method

Implementing a flexible searching infrastructure using nHibernate

My aim is to implement a quite generic search mechanism. Here's the general idea:
you can search based on any property of the entity you're searching for (for example- by Employee's salary, or by Department name etc.).
Each property you can search by is represented by a class, which inherits from EntityProperty:
public abstract class EntityProperty<T>
where T:Entity
{
public enum Operator
{
In,
NotIn,
}
/// <summary>
/// Name of the property
/// </summary>
public abstract string Name { get; }
//Add a search term to the given query, using the given values
public abstract IQueryable<T> AddSearchTerm(IQueryable<T> query, IEnumerable<object> values);
public abstract IQueryable<T> AddSortingTerm(IQueryable<T> query);
protected Operator _operator = Operator.In;
protected bool _sortAscending = false;
public EntityProperty(Operator op)
{
_operator = op;
}
//use this c'tor if you're using the property for sorting only
public EntityProperty(bool sortAscending)
{
_sortAscending = sortAscending;
}
}
all of the properties you're searching / sorting by are stored in a simple collection class:
public class SearchParametersCollection<T>
where T: Entity
{
public IDictionary<EntityProperty<T>,IEnumerable<object>> SearchProperties { get; private set; }
public IList<EntityProperty<T>> SortProperties { get; private set; }
public SearchParametersCollection()
{
SearchProperties = new Dictionary<EntityProperty<T>, IEnumerable<object>>();
SortProperties = new List<EntityProperty<T>>();
}
public void AddSearchProperty(EntityProperty<T> property, IEnumerable<object> values)
{
SearchProperties.Add(property, values);
}
public void AddSortProperty(EntityProperty<T> property)
{
if (SortProperties.Contains(property))
{
throw new ArgumentException(string.Format("property {0} already exists in sorting order", property.Name));
}
SortProperties.Add(property);
}
}
now, all the repository class has to do is:
protected IEnumerable<T> Search<T>(SearchParametersCollection<T> parameters)
where T : Entity
{
IQueryable<T> query = this.Session.Linq<T>();
foreach (var searchParam in parameters.SearchProperties)
{
query = searchParam.Key.AddSearchTerm(query, searchParam.Value);
}
//add order
foreach (var sortParam in parameters.SortProperties)
{
query = sortParam.AddSortingTerm(query);
}
return query.AsEnumerable();
}
for example, here's a class which implements searching a user by their full name:
public class UserFullName : EntityProperty<User>
{
public override string Name
{
get { return "Full Name"; }
}
public override IQueryable<User> AddSearchTerm(IQueryable<User> query, IEnumerable<object> values)
{
switch (_operator)
{
case Operator.In:
//btw- this doesn't work with nHibernate... :(
return query.Where(u => (values.Cast<string>().Count(v => u.FullName.Contains(v)) > 0));
case Operator.NotIn:
return query.Where(u => (values.Cast<string>().Count(v => u.FullName.Contains(v)) == 0));
default:
throw new InvalidOperationException("Unrecognized operator " + _operator.ToString());
}
}
public override IQueryable<User> AddSortingTerm(IQueryable<User> query)
{
return (_sortAscending) ? query.OrderBy(u => u.FullName) : query.OrderByDescending(u => u.FullName);
}
public UserFullName(bool sortAscending)
: base(sortAscending)
{
}
public UserFullName(Operator op)
: base(op)
{
}
}
my questions are:
1. firstly- am I even on the right track? I don't know of any well-known method for achieving what I want, but I may be wrong...
2. it seems to me that the Properties classes should be in the domain layer and not in the DAL, since I'd like the controller layers to be able to use them. However, that prevents me from using any nHibernate-specific implementation of the search (i.e any other interface but Linq). Can anybody think of a solution that would enable me to utilize the full power of nH while keeping these classes visible to upper layers? I've thought about moving them to the 'Common' project, but 'Common' has no knowledge of the Model entities, and I'd like to keep it that way.
3. as you can see by my comment for the AddSearchTerm method- I haven't really been able to implement 'in' operator using nH (I'm using nH 2.1.2 with Linq provider). any sugggestions in that respect would be appriciated. (see also my question from yesterday).
thanks!
If you need good API to query NHIbernate objects then you should use ICriteria (for NH 2.x) or QueryOver (for NH 3.x).
You over complicating DAL with these searches. Ayende has a nice post about why you should not do it
I ended up using query objects, which greatly simplified things.

Ninject, Generic Referential Bindings

I think this falls under the concept of contextual binding, but the Ninject documentation, while very thorough, does not have any examples close enough to my current situation for me to really be certain. I'm still pretty confused.
I basically have classes that represent parameter structures for queries. For instance..
class CurrentUser {
string Email { get; set; }
}
And then an interface that represents its database retrieval (in the data layer)
class CurrentUserQuery : IQueryFor<CurrentUser> {
public CurrentUserQuery(ISession session) {
this.session = session;
}
public Member ExecuteQuery(CurrentUser parameters) {
var member = session.Query<Member>().Where(n => n.Email == CurrentUser.Email);
// validation logic
return member;
}
}
Now then, what I want to do is to establish a simple class that can take a given object and from it get the IQueryFor<T> class, construct it from my Ninject.IKernel (constructor parameter), and perform the ExecuteQuery method on it, passing through the given object.
The only way I have been able to do this was to basically do the following...
Bind<IQueryFor<CurrentUser>>().To<CurrentUserQuery>();
This solves the problem for that one query. But I anticipate there will be a great number of queries... so this method will become not only tedious, but also very prone to redundancy.
I was wondering if there is an inherit way in Ninject to incorporate this kind of behavior.
:-
In the end, my (ideal) way of using this would be ...
class HomeController : Controller {
public HomeController(ITransit transit) {
// injection of the transit service
}
public ActionResult CurrentMember() {
var member = transit.Send(new CurrentUser{ Email = User.Identity.Name });
}
}
Obviously that's not going to work right, since the Send method has no way of knowing the return type.
I've been dissecting Rhino Service Bus extensively and project Alexandria to try and make my light, light, lightweight implementation.
Update
I have been able to get a fairly desired result using .NET 4.0 dynamic objects, such as the following...
dynamic Send<T>(object message);
And then declaring my interface...
public interface IQueryFor<T,K>
{
K Execute(T message);
}
And then its use ...
public class TestCurrentMember
{
public string Email { get; set; }
}
public class TestCurrentMemberQuery : IConsumerFor<TestCurrentMember, Member>
{
private readonly ISession session;
public TestCurrentMemberQuery(ISession session) {
this.session = session;
}
public Member Execute(TestCurrentMember user)
{
// query the session for the current member
var member = session.Query<Member>()
.Where(n => n.Email == user.Email).SingleOrDefault();
return member;
}
}
And then in my Controller...
var member = Transit.Send<TestCurrentMemberQuery>(
new TestCurrentMember {
Email = User.Identity.Name
}
);
effectively using the <T> as my 'Hey, This is what implements the query parameters!'. It does work, but I feel pretty uncomfortable with it. Is this an inappropriate use of the dynamic function of .NET 4.0? Or is this more the reason why it exists in the first place?
Update (2)
For the sake of consistency and keeping this post relative to just the initial question, I'm opening up a different question for the dynamic issue.
Yes, you should be able to handle this with Ninject Conventions. I am just learning the Conventions part of Ninject, and the documentation is sparse; however, the source code for the Conventions extension is quite light and easy to read/navigate, also Remo Gloor is very helpful both here and on the mailing list.
The first thing I would try is a GenericBindingGenerator (changing the filters and scope as needed for your application):
internal class YourModule : NinjectModule
{
public override void Load()
{
Kernel.Scan(a => {
a.From(System.Reflection.Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly());
a.InTransientScope();
a.BindWith(new GenericBindingGenerator(typeof(IQueryFor<>)));
});
}
}
The heart of any BindingGenerator is this interface:
public interface IBindingGenerator
{
void Process(Type type, Func<IContext, object> scopeCallback, IKernel kernel);
}
The Default Binding Generator simply checks if the name of the class matches the name of the interface:
public void Process(Type type, Func<IContext, object> scopeCallback, IKernel kernel)
{
if (!type.IsInterface && !type.IsAbstract)
{
Type service = type.GetInterface("I" + type.Name, false);
if (service != null)
{
kernel.Bind(service).To(type).InScope(scopeCallback);
}
}
}
The GenericBindingGenerator takes a type as a constructor argument, and checks interfaces on classes scanned to see if the Generic definitions of those interfaces match the type passed into the constructor:
public GenericBindingGenerator(Type contractType)
{
if (!contractType.IsGenericType && !contractType.ContainsGenericParameters)
{
throw new ArgumentException("The contract must be an open generic type.", "contractType");
}
this._contractType = contractType;
}
public void Process(Type type, Func<IContext, object> scopeCallback, IKernel kernel)
{
Type service = this.ResolveClosingInterface(type);
if (service != null)
{
kernel.Bind(service).To(type).InScope(scopeCallback);
}
}
public Type ResolveClosingInterface(Type targetType)
{
if (!targetType.IsInterface && !targetType.IsAbstract)
{
do
{
foreach (Type type in targetType.GetInterfaces())
{
if (type.IsGenericType && (type.GetGenericTypeDefinition() == this._contractType))
{
return type;
}
}
targetType = targetType.BaseType;
}
while (targetType != TypeOfObject);
}
return null;
}
So, when the Conventions extension scans the class CurrentUserQuery it will see the interface IQueryFor<CurrentUser>. The generic definition of that interface is IQueryFor<>, so it will match and that type should get registered for that interface.
Lastly, there is a RegexBindingGenerator. It tries to match interfaces of the classes scanned to a Regex given as a constructor argument. If you want to see the details of how that operates, you should be able to peruse the source code for it now.
Also, you should be able to write any implementation of IBindingGenerator that you may need, as the contract is quite simple.