I have a class that implements the IValidatableObject interface, in order to validate the incoming data introduced by the user. The problem is that in order to validate that data, I need to use a class that implements the data repository pattern, which is in another assembly. Something like this:
public class SelectedFilteringCriteria : IValidatableObject
{
private IFiltersRepository _filtersRepository;
public SelectedFilteringCriteria(IFiltersRepository filtersRepository)
{
_filtersRepository = filtersRepository;
}
public int? SelectedValue { get; set; }
public IEnumerable<ValidationResult> Validate(ValidationContext validationContext)
{
var results = new List<ValidationResult>();
var valueOk = _filtersRepository.GetFilters().Any(
filter => filter.Value == SelectedValue
);
if (!valueOk)
{
results.Add(new ValidationResult("Not good :("));
}
return results;
}
}
The dependency container I'm using is Ninject. I would like to know if there's a way to tell MVC to inject the repository class into the IValidatableObject when it's going to be created.
Nope, it seems it's not possible because the MutableObjectModelBinder class, which is the one MVC 5 uses to create the corresponding object (SelectedFilteringCriteria in my case) from the action parameters, uses System.Activator instead of resolving the dependencies SelectedFilteringCriteria could have using the current DependencyResolver.
A workaround for this could be to do this inside the constructor of SelectedFilteringCriteria:
public SelectedFilteringCriteria()
{
_filtersRepository = DependencyResolver.Current.GetService<IFiltersRepository>();
}
But that could drive to the Service Locator Antipattern. Your choice.
Related
Hi I have model class which is written in MVC.I am using Ef database first approach. In model class I have some queries which deals with database. I have following questions :
1) Is it right way to use database related queries in Model and call that in controller or view?
2)If yes where I should call this model? In Controller or in view ??
3)How I should call this model? Say for example I have class called class1.cs in model.How I should call this model?
Your model contains classes that define the different objects troughout your project. This includes properties with their basic information and methods to perform actions on this object.
1)
Do you really need queries? Why not use the Entity Framework to do it for you? Create the mapping for your domain classes (either trough annotations or fluent api) and use the DbContext to retrieve and save the data stored in your database
2)
Ideally people create repositories that are injected into your controllers (Dependency Injection). These repositories can for example contain something like GetPersonById(int id). Inside this method there would be two things:
Perform an action on the domain object
Save it to the DbContext
For example:
public void Subscribe(int userID, Show show) {
var user = GetUserByID(userID);
if (!user.IsSubscribedTo(show.ShowID)) {
user.Subscribe(show);
_dbContext.SaveChanges();
}
}
Controller -> Method call in repository -> Perform action on corresponding domain object -> Save changes to the database
If you need something that doesn't require an object mutation, it's even more simple:
public User GetUserByID(int id) {
return _dbContext.Users.FirstOrDefault(x => x.ID == id);
}
3)
Trough repositories (see above). Your DbContext will have a bunch of DbSets that contain objects that correspond with every data entry in your database. Trough repositories you can work with these objects and manipulate them. When you call the DbContext.SaveChanges() method, it will look at what has changed in these lists and commit the changes to your database.
Repository example:
class User {
public int ID { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
}
class DatabaseContext : DbContext {
public DbSet<User> Users { get; set; }
}
public interface IUserRepository {
User GetUserByID (int id);
bool UsernameExists (string name);
}
public class UserRepository : IUserRepository {
private DatabaseContext _db;
public UserRepository(DatabaseContext db){
_db = db;
}
public User GetUserByID(int id) {
return _db.Users.FirstOrDefault(x => x.ID == id);
}
public User GetUserByUsername(string username) {
return _db.Users.FirstOrDefault(x => x.Name == username);
}
}
public class UserController : Controller {
private IUserRepository _userRepository;
public UserController(IUserRepository userRepository) {
_userRepository = userRepository;
}
public ActionResult Details(int id){
return View(_userRepository.GetUserByID(id);
}
}
// Ninject settings (install this extension, you want it):
private void AddBindings(){
kernel.Bind<DatabaseContext>().ToSelf().InSingletonScope();
kernel.Bind<IUserRepository>().To<UserRepository>().InRequestScope();
}
You could use some sort of Unit Of Work pattern which you inject in your controller constructor using an inversion of control container (IOC), for instance autofac.
Your unit of work class could hold a reference to repositories, where you would query/insert your data.
Roughly;
public class BackendController : Controller
{
private UnitOfWork _worker;
public BackendController(UnitOfWork worker)
{
this._worker = worker;
}
public ActionResult Admin()
{
var items = _worker.MyRepository.GetAll();
return View(items);
}
}
public class UnitOfWork
{
private ContentRepository _contentRepository;
public UnitOfWork()
{
}
public ContentRepository MyRepository
{
get
{
if (_contentRepository != null)
return _contentRepository;
else
return _contentRepository = new ContentRepository();
}
}
}
public class ContentRepository
{
// holds an object context and methods to retrieve and put data (EF or similar)
}
You would have to register your instance with the IOC container in global.asax, application_start for example, something like this (Using autofac as IOC):
UnitOfWork worker = new UnitOfWork();
var builder = new ContainerBuilder();
builder.RegisterControllers(Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly());
builder.RegisterInstance(worker).SingleInstance();
var container = builder.Build();
...
1) Is it right way to use database related queries in Model and call that in controller or view?
I would recommend not directly accessing the database in your model classes, as you have to remember that MVC is strictly a presentation layer pattern. If you do put your database access logic in your model classes, then you will not be able to have any other client use this functionality, such as a web service. Instead have logic that translates your business objects, defined outside of your ASP.NET MVC project, into your ASP.NET MVC model classes.
This is where the power of n-tier architecture shines, if you create a business and data-access layer, then I could write an ASP.NET MVC front-end, WebForms front-end, WPF front-end, WinForms front-end and all of them could access data using the same service. By putting the logic into the ASP.NET MVC model classes, then you are effectively forcing any other client to duplicate that logic again in their classes.
I'm using the Fluent Validation framework in my ASP.net MVC 3 project. So far all of my validations have been very simple (make sure string is not empty, only a certain length, etc.) but now I need to verify that something exists in the database or not.
Should Fluent Validation be used in this case?
If the database validation should be done using Fluent Validation, then how do I handle dependencies? The validator classes are created automatically, and I would need to somehow pass it one of my repository instances in order to query my database.
An example of what I'm trying to validate might:
I have a dropdown list on my page with a list of selected items. I want to validate that the item they selected actually exists in the database before trying to save a new record.
Edit
Here is a code example of a regular validation in Fluent Validation framework:
[Validator(typeof(CreateProductViewModelValidator))]
public class CreateProductViewModel
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public decimal Price { get; set; }
}
public class CreateProductViewModelValidator : AbstractValidator<CreateProductViewModel>
{
public CreateProductViewModelValidator()
{
RuleFor(m => m.Name).NotEmpty();
}
}
Controller:
public ActionResult Create(CreateProductViewModel model)
{
if(!ModelState.IsValid)
{
return View(model);
}
var product = new Product { Name = model.Name, Price = model.Price };
repository.AddProduct(product);
return RedirectToAction("Index");
}
As you can see, I never create the Validator myself. This works because of the following line in Global.asax:
FluentValidation.Mvc.FluentValidationModelValidatorProvider.Configure();
The problem is that now I have a validator that needs to interact with my database using a repository, but since I'm not creating the validators I don't know how I would get that dependency passed in, other than hardcoding the concrete type.
Can't you just create your own validation method where in you would kick-off the database validation?
RuleFor(m => m.name)
.Must(BeInDatabase)
private static bool BeInDatabase(string name)
{
// Do database validation and return false if not valid
return false;
}
I'm using FluentValidation for DataBase validations. just pass the Validation class the session in the Ctor. and do the validation inside the action something like:
var validationResult = new ProdcutValidator(session).Validate(product);
Update: Based on your example I add my example...
public class CreateProductViewModel
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public decimal Price { get; set; }
}
public class CreateProductViewModelValidator : abstractValidator<CreateProductViewModel>
{
private readonly ISession _session;
public CreateProductViewModelValidator(ISession session)
{
_session = session;
RuleFor(m => m.Name).NotEmpty();
RuleFor(m => m.Code).Must(m, Code => _session<Product>.Get(Code) == null);
}
}
Controller:
public ActionResult Create(CreateProductViewModel model)
{
var validator = new CreateProductViewModelValidator();
var validationResult =validator.Validate(model);
if(!validationResult.IsValid)
{
// You will have to add the errors by hand to the ModelState's errors so the
// user will be able to know why the post didn't succeeded(It's better writing
// a global function(in your "base controller" That Derived From Controller)
// that migrate the validation result to the
// ModelState so you could use the ModelState Only.
return View(model);
}
var product = new Product { Name = model.Name, Price = model.Price };
repository.AddProduct(product);
return RedirectToAction("Index");
}
Second update:
If you insist using parameterless constructor you will have to use some Inversion Of control container, a static class that is something like the Factory of your objects.
use it like this:
public class CreateProductViewModelValidator : abstractValidator<CreateProductViewModel>
{
private readonly ISession _session;
public CreateProductViewModelValidator()
{
_session = IoC.Container.Reslove<ISession>();
RuleFor(m => m.Name).NotEmpty();
RuleFor(m => m.Code).Must(m, Code => _session<Product>.Get(Code) == null);
}
}
You can find many IoC containers, most famous are Windsor and Ninject,
You will need to register- instruct the container once to resolve all the ISession to return your's session object.
The other way this could work for you is using Constructor injection. While this method isn't as clear cut as using an IoC library, it may help if you have a static way of accessing or fetching your session.
public class CreateProductViewModelValidator
{
private ISession _session;
public CreateProductViewModelValidator()
:this(SessionFactory.GetCurrentSession()) //Or some other way of fetching the repository.
{
}
internal CreateProductViewModelValidator(ISession session)
{
this._session = session;
RuleFor(m => m.Name);//More validation here using ISession...
}
}
I have been spending quite a bit of time thinking about this exact same issue. I am using ninject to inject my repository into my web UI layer so that my web UI only accesses the database through an interface.
I am wanting to be able to validate things that access the database such as checking for duplicate names and hence my validation needs to access the injected repository. I think that the best way to do this is to just setup Fluent Validation via the manual method rather than the MVC integrated way. For Example:
Create your validation Class (can pass in repository Interface):
public class CategoryDataBaseValidation : AbstractValidator<CategoryViewModel>
{
private IRepository repository;
public CategoryDataBaseValidation (IRepository repoParam)
{
repository = repoParam;
RuleFor(Category => Category.Name).Must(NotHaveDuplicateName).WithMessage("Name already exists");
}
private bool NotHaveDuplicateName(string name)
{
List<Category> c = repository.Categories.ToList(); //Just showing that you can access DB here and do what you like.
return false;
}
}
}
Then in your controller you can just create an instance of above class and pass in the repository (that ninject would have injected in the controller constructor)
[HttpPost]
public ActionResult Create(CategoryViewModel _CategoryViewModel )
{
CategoryDataBaseValidation validator = new CategoryDataBaseValidation (repository);
ValidationResult results = validator.Validate(_CategoryViewModel );
if (results.IsValid == false)
{
foreach (var failure in results.Errors)
{
//output error
}
}
return View(category);
}
Both the above files can live in the Web UI project and you can then also just use the standard MVC DataAnnotations for client side validation.
Just thought that I would put this up for comment / help someone.
I have read many posts on Session-scoped data in MVC, but I am still unclear where is the right place to include a custom Session wrapper into the solution.
I want to get the Username of the current user from the IPrincipal, load additional information about that User and store it in the Session. Then I want to access that User data from the Controller and the View.
None of the following approaches seem to fit what I want to do.
Option 1 : Access the Session collection directly
Everyone seems to agree this is a bad idea, but honestly it seems like the simplest thing that works. However, it doesn't make the User available to the view.
public class ControllerBase : Controller {
public ControllerBase() : this(new UserRepository()) {}
public ControllerBase(IUserRepository userRepository) {
_userRepository = userRepository;
}
protected IUserRepository _userRepository = null;
protected const string _userSessionKey = "ControllerBase_UserSessionKey";
protected User {
get {
var user = HttpContext.Current.Session[_userSessionKey] as User;
if (user == null) {
var principal = this.HttpContext.User;
if (principal != null) {
user = _userRepository.LoadByName(principal.Identity.Name);
HttpContext.Current.Session[_userSessionKey] = user;
}
}
return user;
}
}
}
Option 2: Injecting the Session into the class constructor forum post
This option seems pretty good, but I am still not sure how to attach it to the Controller and the View. I could new-it-up in the Controller, but shouldn't it be injected as a dependency?
public class UserContext {
public UserContext()
: this(new HttpSessionStateWrapper(HttpContext.Current.Session),
new UserRepository()) { }
public UserContext(HttpSessionStateBase sessionWrapper, IUserRepository userRepository) {
Session = sessionWrapper;
UserRepository = userRepository;
}
private HttpSessionStateBase Session { get; set; }
private IUserRepository UserRepository{ get; set; }
public User Current {
get {
//see same code as option one
}
}
}
Option 3 : Use Brad Wilson's StatefulStorage class
In his presentation Brad Wilson features his StatefulStorage class. It is a clever and useful set of classes which include interfaces and uses constructor injection. However, it seems to lead me down the same path as Option 2. It uses interfaces, but I couldn't use the Container to inject it because it relies on a static factory. Even if I could inject it, how does it get passed to the View. Does every ViewModel have to have a base class with a setable User property?
Option 4 : Use something similar to the Hanselman IPrincipal ModelBinder
I could add the User as a parameter to the Action method and use a ModelBinder to hydrate it from the Session. This seems like a lot of overhead to add it everywhere it is needed. Plus I would still have to add it to the ViewModel to make it available to the View.
public ActionResult Edit(int id,
[ModelBinder(typeof(IPrincipalModelBinder))] IPrincipal user)
{ ... }
I feel like I am overthinking this, but it also seems like there should be an obvious place to do this sort of thing. What am I missing?
My approach to Session:
Cover Session with interface:
public interface ISessionWrapper
{
int SomeInteger { get; set; }
}
Implement interface using HttpContext.Current.Session:
public class HttpContextSessionWrapper : ISessionWrapper
{
private T GetFromSession<T>(string key)
{
return (T) HttpContext.Current.Session[key];
}
private void SetInSession(string key, object value)
{
HttpContext.Current.Session[key] = value;
}
public int SomeInteger
{
get { return GetFromSession<int>("SomeInteger"); }
set { SetInSession("SomeInteger", value); }
}
}
Inject into Controller:
public class BaseController : Controller
{
public ISessionWrapper SessionWrapper { get; set; }
public BaseController(ISessionWrapper sessionWrapper)
{
SessionWrapper = sessionWrapper;
}
}
Ninject dependency:
Bind<ISessionWrapper>().To<HttpContextSessionWrapper>()
You can pass some commonly used information using ViewData when you want to use it in master page and using view model in specific views.
I would strongly recommend passing anything you need in the view down via the controller. That way, the decision on exactly what data the view should render stays with the controller. In order to make that as easy as possible, creating an abstract ViewModelWithUserBase class that has a settable User property really isn't a bad idea. An option is to create an interface IViewModelWithUser, and re-implement the User property every time (or combine with the base class, but you would have the option to re-implement instead of inheriting the base class if that makes things easier in some corner cases).
As far as populating this property, it can probably be done easily with an action filter. Utilizing the OnActionExecuted method you can test if the model passed to the view implements your base class (or interface), and then fill the property with the correct IPrincipal object if appropriate. This has the advantage that since action filters aren't executed in unit tests, you can use the HttpContext.Current.Session dependent code from your option 1 in your action filter, and still have a testable interface on the controller.
I edited my whole question, so do not wonder :)
Well, I want to have an ActionResult that takes domain model data and some additional parameters, i.e page index and page size for paging a list. It decide itself if it returns a PartialViewResult or a ViewResult depending on the kind of web request (ajax request or not).
The reffered data shall be mapped automatically by using an IMappingService, which is responsible for transforming any domain model data into a view model.
The MappingService uses AutoMapper for simplicity.
MappingActionResult:
public abstract class MappingActionResult : ActionResult
{
public static IMappingService MappingService;
}
BaseHybridViewResult:
public abstract class BaseHybridViewResult : MappingActionResult
{
public const string defaultViewName = "Grid";
public string ViewNameForAjaxRequest { get; set; }
public object ViewModel { get; set; }
public override void ExecuteResult(ControllerContext context)
{
if (context == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("context");
var usePartial = ShouldUsePartial(context);
ActionResult res = GetInnerViewResult(usePartial);
res.ExecuteResult(context);
}
private ActionResult GetInnerViewResult(bool usePartial)
{
ViewDataDictionary viewDataDictionary = new ViewDataDictionary(ViewModel);
if (String.IsNullOrEmpty(ViewNameForAjaxRequest))
{
ViewNameForAjaxRequest = defaultViewName;
}
if (usePartial)
{
return new PartialViewResult { ViewData = viewDataDictionary, ViewName = ViewNameForAjaxRequest };
}
return new ViewResult { ViewData = viewDataDictionary };
}
private static bool ShouldUsePartial(ControllerContext context)
{
return context.HttpContext.Request.IsAjaxRequest();
}
}
AutoMappedHybridViewResult:
public class AutoMappedHybridViewResult<TSourceElement, TDestinationElement> : BaseHybridViewResult
{
public AutoMappedHybridViewResult(PagedList<TSourceElement> pagedList)
{
ViewModel = MappingService.MapToViewModelPagedList<TSourceElement, TDestinationElement>(pagedList);
}
public AutoMappedHybridViewResult(PagedList<TSourceElement> pagedList, string viewNameForAjaxRequest)
{
ViewNameForAjaxRequest = viewNameForAjaxRequest;
ViewModel = MappingService.MapToViewModelPagedList<TSourceElement, TDestinationElement>(pagedList);
}
public AutoMappedHybridViewResult(TSourceElement model)
{
ViewModel = MappingService.Map<TSourceElement, TDestinationElement>(model);
}
public AutoMappedHybridViewResult(TSourceElement model, string viewNameForAjaxRequest)
{
ViewNameForAjaxRequest = viewNameForAjaxRequest;
ViewModel = MappingService.Map<TSourceElement, TDestinationElement>(model);
}
}
Usage in controller:
public ActionResult Index(int page = 1)
{
return new AutoMappedHybridViewResult<TeamEmployee, TeamEmployeeForm>(_teamEmployeeRepository.GetPagedEmployees(page, PageSize));
}
So as you can see the IMappingService is hidden. The controller should not know anything about the IMappingService interface, when AutoMappedHybridViewResult is used.
Is the MappingActionResult with the static IMappingServer appropriate or am I violating the DI principle?
I think a better design is to have a ViewResultFactory that depends on IMappingService, then you can inject that into your controller. Then you call it like so:
public class MyController : Controller
{
IViewResultFactory _viewResultFactory;
ITeamEmployeeRepository _teamEmployeeRepository;
public MyController(IViewResultFactory viewResultFactory)
{
_viewResultFactory = viewResultFactory;
}
public ActionResult MyAction(int page, int pageSize)
{
return
_viewResultFactory.GetResult<TeamEmployee, TeamEmployeeForm>(
_teamEmployeeRepository.GetPagedEmployees(page, pageSize));
}
}
The implementation would like this (you would need to create overloads for each of your HybridViewResult constructors):
public HybridViewResult<TSourceElement, TDestinationElement> GetResult<TSourceElement, TDestinationElement>(PagedList<TSourceElement> pagedList)
{
return new HybridViewResult<TSourceElement, TDestinationElement>(_mappingService, pagedList);
}
That way you hide the implementation from your controllers, and you don't have to depend on the container.
There are a few different points that you could inject IMappingService. http://codeclimber.net.nz/archive/2009/04/08/13-asp.net-mvc-extensibility-points-you-have-to-know.aspx is a good site for help in picking the appropriate extensibility points for .NET MVC.
If you want to stick with having this functionality be a derived ActionResult, then I think you could put the dependency in the ActionInvoker if you want to, but the Controller makes more sense to me. If you don't want the IMappingService in the Controller, you could always wrap it in a HybridViewResultFactory, and access that object in the Controller. In that case your shortcut methods would look like:
public HybridViewResult<TSourceElement, TDestinationElement> AutoMappedHybridView<TSourceElement,TDestinationElement>(PagedList<TSourceElement> pagedList, string viewNameForAjaxRequest)
{
HybridViewResultFactory.Create<TSourceElement, TDestinationElement>(pagedList, viewNameForAjaxRequest);
}
etc.
I'm not sure why you need to use an ActionResult, but if there is no reason that makes it explicitly necessary, you could create a HybridViewModel class and a HybridViewModelBinder class that is injected with the mapping service dependency.
I am assuming you want to use constructor injection, but if you have the StructureMap dependency in your UI assembly, you could access a static dependency resolver class (like Clowers said).
This question would be easier to give a definite answer to if I understood why you using an ActionResult.
It seems like you are using the action result to handle two functionalities that do not necessarily go together all the time, and that could be used separately. Also, there is not a clear indication that it needs to be in an ActionResult.
Presumably, you could (a) leverage the Automapper functionality for results other than html (ViewResult) output, and (b) you could leverage the functionality of auto-detecting ajax requests without needing to automap the model.
It seems to me like the automapping of the view model could be used to inject the view model into the controller action directly, thus removing the controller's dependency on the IMappingService. What you would need is a ModelBinder class to be injected with your IMappingService (the implementation of which I assume contains a repository or datastore type dependency).
Here is a good article explaining how to leverage model binders: http://odetocode.com/blogs/scott/archive/2009/04/27/6-tips-for-asp-net-mvc-model-binding.aspx.
Then you can overwrite the DefaultModelBinder in the classes that need to be Automapped as follows:
public ActionResult DoItLikeThis([AutoMap(typeof(MyDomainModelClass))]MyViewModelClass viewModel){
//controller action logic
}
Now, regarding the HybridViewResult, I would suggest that you handle this with an Action Filter instead. So, you could just use ActionResult or ViewResultBase as the Result type of your action method and decorate it with an action filter, i.e.:
[AutoSelectViewResult]
public ViewResultBase AndDoThisLikeSo(){
//controller action logic
}
I think overall this will be a much better solution than coupling these two functionalities to an ActionResult.
I would like to have my own injection attribute so that I am not coupling my code to a particular IOC framework. I have a custom injection attribute that my code uses to denote that a property should be injected.
public class CustomInjectAttribute : Attribute {}
Fictitious example below...
public class Robot : IRobot
{
[CustomInject]
public ILaser Zap { get; set; }
...
}
In Ninject, you can setup an injection Heuristic to find that attribute, and inject like;
public class NinjectInjectionHeuristic : NinjectComponent, IInjectionHeuristic, INinjectComponent, IDisposable
{
public new bool ShouldInject(MemberInfo member)
{
return member.IsDefined(typeof(CustomInjectAttribute), true);
}
}
and then register the heuristic with the kernel.
Kernel.Components.Get<ISelector>().InjectionHeuristics.Add(new NinjectInjectionHeuristic());
How would I go about achieving this with StructureMap. I know StructureMap has its own SetterProperties and attributes, but I'm looking for a way to decouple from that as you can with Ninject in the above example.
Use the SetAllProperties() method in your ObjectFactory or Container configuration. For example:
new Container(x =>
{
x.SetAllProperties(by =>
{
by.Matching(prop => prop.HasAttribute<CustomInjectAttribute>());
});
});
This makes use of a handy extension method (that should be in the BCL):
public static bool HasAttribute<T>(this ICustomAttributeProvider provider) where T : Attribute
{
return provider.GetCustomAttributes(typeof (T), true).Any();
}