Model binding HttpPostedFileBase and then storing the file to datastore - asp.net-mvc

ASP.NET MVC seems to correctly automatically bind between HTML form's file input field and HttpPostedFileBase. On the other hand it cannot bind from file input field to byte array..I tried and it issues exception - something about not being able to convert to Base64. I had only the byte array property on my Model classes previously because later on I need it to perform serialization of the object into XML file.
Now I've come up with this workaround and it works fine but I am not sure if this will be ok:
[DataContract]
public class Section : BaseContentObject
{
...
[DataMember]
public byte[] ImageBytes;
private HttpPostedFileBase _imageFile;
public HttpPostedFileBase ImageFile
{
get { return _imageFile; }
set
{
_imageFile = value;
if (value.ContentLength > 0)
{
byte[] buffer = new byte[value.ContentLength];
value.InputStream.Read(buffer, 0, value.ContentLength);
ImageBytes = buffer;
ImageType = value.ContentType;
}
}
}
[DataMember]
public string ImageType { get; set; }
}

I think you are letting your Model connect to closely with your Controller. The usual way to do this is:
public ActionResult AcceptFile(HttpPostedFileBase submittedFile) {
var bytes = submittedFile.FileContents;
var model = new DatabaseThing { data = bytes };
model.SaveToDatabase();
}
In this case, there is no need for your Model to be aware of HttpPostedFileBase, which is strictly an ASP.NET concept.
If you need complex binding beyond what the DefaultModelBinder supplies (which is alot), the usual way is to register specialized ModelBinders in Global.asax and then accept your own Model classes as Action Method arguments, like so:
In Global.asax:
ModelBinders.Binders.Add(typeof(MyThing), new ThingModelBinder());
This ModelBinder could then, for example, find any file that was posted with the form and bind the contents of that file to the Data property of your Thing.
And in your Controller:
public ActionResult AcceptThing(MyThing thing) {
thing.Data.SaveToDatabase();
}
In this Action Method, your ThingModelBinder would have handled all binding, making it transparent to both the Controller and the Model.
Modifying your actual Model classes to be aware of, and function with, ASP.NET would not be necessary in this case. Your Model classes are, after all, supposed to represent your actual data.

Apparently there are huge changes (just found it out) in MVC Futures 2, especially regarding Model Binders.
For instance, the problem with my input file binding to byte array, there is a binder now:
• BinaryDataModelBinderProvider – Handles binding base-64 encoded input to byte[] and System.Linq.Data.Binary models.

Related

How to bind view model property with different name

Is there a way to make a reflection for a view model property as an element with different name and id values on the html side.
That is the main question of what I want to achieve. So the basic introduction for the question is like:
1- I have a view model (as an example) which created for a filter operation in view side.
public class FilterViewModel
{
public string FilterParameter { get; set; }
}
2- I have a controller action which is created for GETting form values(here it is filter)
public ActionResult Index(FilterViewModel filter)
{
return View();
}
3- I have a view that a user can filter on some data and sends parameters via querystring over form submit.
#using (Html.BeginForm("Index", "Demo", FormMethod.Get))
{
#Html.LabelFor(model => model.FilterParameter)
#Html.EditorFor(model => model.FilterParameter)
<input type="submit" value="Do Filter" />
}
4- And what I want to see in rendered view output is
<form action="/Demo" method="get">
<label for="fp">FilterParameter</label>
<input id="fp" name="fp" type="text" />
<input type="submit" value="Do Filter" />
</form>
5- And as a solution I want to modify my view model like this:
public class FilterViewModel
{
[BindParameter("fp")]
[BindParameter("filter")] // this one extra alias
[BindParameter("param")] //this one extra alias
public string FilterParameter { get; set; }
}
So the basic question is about BindAttribute but the usage of complex type properties. But also if there is a built in way of doing this is much better.
Built-in pros:
1- Usage with TextBoxFor, EditorFor, LabelFor and other strongly typed view model helpers can understand and communicate better with each other.
2- Url routing support
3- No framework by desing problems :
In general, we recommend folks don’t write custom model binders
because they’re difficult to get right and they’re rarely needed. The
issue I’m discussing in this post might be one of those cases where
it’s warranted.
Link of quote
And also after some research I found these useful works:
Binding model property with different name
One step upgrade of first link
Here some informative guide
Result: But none of them give me my problems exact solution. I am looking for a strongly typed solution for this problem. Of course if you know any other way to go, please share.
Update
The underlying reasons why I want to do this are basically:
1- Everytime I want to change the html control name then I have to change PropertyName at compile time. (There is a difference Changing a property name between changing a string in code)
2- I want to hide (camouflage) real property names from end users. Most of times View Model property names same as mapped Entity Objects property names. (For developer readability reasons)
3- I don't want to remove the readability for developer. Think about lots of properties with like 2-3 character long and with mo meanings.
4- There are lots of view models written. So changing their names are going to take more time than this solution.
5- This is going to be better solution (in my POV) than others which are described in other questions until now.
Actually, there is a way to do it.
In ASP.NET binding metadata gathered by TypeDescriptor, not by reflection directly. To be more precious, AssociatedMetadataTypeTypeDescriptionProvider is used, which, in turn, simply calls TypeDescriptor.GetProvider with our model type as parameter:
public AssociatedMetadataTypeTypeDescriptionProvider(Type type)
: base(TypeDescriptor.GetProvider(type))
{
}
So, everything we need is to set our custom TypeDescriptionProvider for our model.
Let's implement our custom provider. First of all, let's define attribute for custom property name:
[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Property)]
public class CustomBindingNameAttribute : Attribute
{
public CustomBindingNameAttribute(string propertyName)
{
this.PropertyName = propertyName;
}
public string PropertyName { get; private set; }
}
If you already have attribute with desired name, you can reuse it. Attribute defined above is just an example. I prefer to use JsonPropertyAttribute because in most cases I work with json and Newtonsoft's library and want to define custom name only once.
The next step is to define custom type descriptor. We will not implement whole type descriptor logic and use default implementation. Only property accessing will be overridden:
public class MyTypeDescription : CustomTypeDescriptor
{
public MyTypeDescription(ICustomTypeDescriptor parent)
: base(parent)
{
}
public override PropertyDescriptorCollection GetProperties()
{
return Wrap(base.GetProperties());
}
public override PropertyDescriptorCollection GetProperties(Attribute[] attributes)
{
return Wrap(base.GetProperties(attributes));
}
private static PropertyDescriptorCollection Wrap(PropertyDescriptorCollection src)
{
var wrapped = src.Cast<PropertyDescriptor>()
.Select(pd => (PropertyDescriptor)new MyPropertyDescriptor(pd))
.ToArray();
return new PropertyDescriptorCollection(wrapped);
}
}
Also custom property descriptor need to be implemented. Again, everything except property name will be handled by default descriptor. Note, NameHashCode for some reason is a separate property. As name changed, so it's hash code need to be changed too:
public class MyPropertyDescriptor : PropertyDescriptor
{
private readonly PropertyDescriptor _descr;
private readonly string _name;
public MyPropertyDescriptor(PropertyDescriptor descr)
: base(descr)
{
this._descr = descr;
var customBindingName = this._descr.Attributes[typeof(CustomBindingNameAttribute)] as CustomBindingNameAttribute;
this._name = customBindingName != null ? customBindingName.PropertyName : this._descr.Name;
}
public override string Name
{
get { return this._name; }
}
protected override int NameHashCode
{
get { return this.Name.GetHashCode(); }
}
public override bool CanResetValue(object component)
{
return this._descr.CanResetValue(component);
}
public override object GetValue(object component)
{
return this._descr.GetValue(component);
}
public override void ResetValue(object component)
{
this._descr.ResetValue(component);
}
public override void SetValue(object component, object value)
{
this._descr.SetValue(component, value);
}
public override bool ShouldSerializeValue(object component)
{
return this._descr.ShouldSerializeValue(component);
}
public override Type ComponentType
{
get { return this._descr.ComponentType; }
}
public override bool IsReadOnly
{
get { return this._descr.IsReadOnly; }
}
public override Type PropertyType
{
get { return this._descr.PropertyType; }
}
}
Finally, we need our custom TypeDescriptionProvider and way to bind it to our model type. By default, TypeDescriptionProviderAttribute is designed to perform that binding. But in this case we will not able to get default provider that we want to use internally. In most cases, default provider will be ReflectTypeDescriptionProvider. But this is not guaranteed and this provider is inaccessible due to it's protection level - it's internal. But we do still want to fallback to default provider.
TypeDescriptor also allow to explicitly add provider for our type via AddProvider method. That what we will use. But firstly, let's define our custom provider itself:
public class MyTypeDescriptionProvider : TypeDescriptionProvider
{
private readonly TypeDescriptionProvider _defaultProvider;
public MyTypeDescriptionProvider(TypeDescriptionProvider defaultProvider)
{
this._defaultProvider = defaultProvider;
}
public override ICustomTypeDescriptor GetTypeDescriptor(Type objectType, object instance)
{
return new MyTypeDescription(this._defaultProvider.GetTypeDescriptor(objectType, instance));
}
}
The last step is to bind our provider to our model types. We can implement it in any way we want. For example, let's define some simple class, such as:
public static class TypeDescriptorsConfig
{
public static void InitializeCustomTypeDescriptorProvider()
{
// Assume, this code and all models are in one assembly
var types = Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly().GetTypes()
.Where(t => t.GetProperties().Any(p => p.IsDefined(typeof(CustomBindingNameAttribute))));
foreach (var type in types)
{
var defaultProvider = TypeDescriptor.GetProvider(type);
TypeDescriptor.AddProvider(new MyTypeDescriptionProvider(defaultProvider), type);
}
}
}
And either invoke that code via web activation:
[assembly: PreApplicationStartMethod(typeof(TypeDescriptorsConfig), "InitializeCustomTypeDescriptorProvider")]
Or simply call it in Application_Start method:
public class MvcApplication : HttpApplication
{
protected void Application_Start()
{
TypeDescriptorsConfig.InitializeCustomTypeDescriptorProvider();
// rest of init code ...
}
}
But this is not the end of the story. :(
Consider following model:
public class TestModel
{
[CustomBindingName("actual_name")]
[DisplayName("Yay!")]
public string TestProperty { get; set; }
}
If we try to write in .cshtml view something like:
#model Some.Namespace.TestModel
#Html.DisplayNameFor(x => x.TestProperty) #* fail *#
We will get ArgumentException:
An exception of type 'System.ArgumentException' occurred in System.Web.Mvc.dll but was not handled in user code
Additional information: The property Some.Namespace.TestModel.TestProperty could not be found.
That because all helpers soon or later invoke ModelMetadata.FromLambdaExpression method. And this method take expression we provided (x => x.TestProperty) and takes member name directly from member info and have no clue about any of our attributes, metadata (who cares, huh?):
internal static ModelMetadata FromLambdaExpression<TParameter, TValue>(/* ... */)
{
// ...
case ExpressionType.MemberAccess:
MemberExpression memberExpression = (MemberExpression) expression.Body;
propertyName = memberExpression.Member is PropertyInfo ? memberExpression.Member.Name : (string) null;
// I want to cry here - ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
// ...
}
For x => x.TestProperty (where x is TestModel) this method will return TestProperty, not actual_name, but model metadata contains actual_name property, have no TestProperty. That is why the property could not be found error thrown.
This is a design failure.
However despite this little inconvenience there are several workarounds, such as:
The easiest way is to access our members by theirs redefined names:
#model Some.Namespace.TestModel
#Html.DisplayName("actual_name") #* this will render "Yay!" *#
This is not good. No intellisense at all and as our model change we will have no any compilation errors. On any change anything can be broken and there is no easy way to detect that.
Another way is a bit more complex - we can create our own version of that helpers and forbid anybody from calling default helpers or ModelMetadata.FromLambdaExpression for model classes with renamed properties.
Finally, combination of previous two would be preferred: write own analogue to get property name with redefinition support, then pass that into default helper. Something like this:
#model Some.Namespace.TestModel
#Html.DisplayName(Html.For(x => x.TestProperty))
Compilation-time and intellisense support and no need to spend a lot of time for complete set of helpers. Profit!
Also everything described above work like a charm for model binding. During model binding process default binder also use metadata, gathered by TypeDescriptor.
But I guess binding json data is the best use case. You know, lots of web software and standards use lowercase_separated_by_underscores naming convention. Unfortunately this is not usual convention for C#. Having classes with members named in different convention looks ugly and can end up in troubles. Especially when you have tools that whining every time about naming violation.
ASP.NET MVC default model binder does not bind json to model the same way as it happens when you call newtonsoft's JsonConverter.DeserializeObject method. Instead, json parsed into dictionary. For example:
{
complex: {
text: "blabla",
value: 12.34
},
num: 1
}
will be translated into following dictionary:
{ "complex.text", "blabla" }
{ "complex.value", "12.34" }
{ "num", "1" }
And later these values along with others values from query string, route data and so on, collected by different implementations of IValueProvider, will be used by default binder to bind a model with help of metadata, gathered by TypeDescriptor.
So we came full circle from creating model, rendering, binding it back and use it.
The short answer is NO and long answer still NO. There is no built-in helper, attribute, model binder, whatever is it (Nothing out of box).
But what I did in before answer (I deleted it) was an awful solution that I realized yesterday. I am going to put it in github for who still wants to see (maybe it solves somebody problem) (I don't suggest it also!)
Now I searched it for again and I couldn't find anything helpful. If you are using something like AutoMapper or ValueInjecter like tool for mapping your ViewModel objects to Business objects and if you want to obfuscate that View Model parameters also, probably you are in some trouble. Of course you can do it but strongly typed html helpers are not going to help you alot. I even not talking about the if other developers taking branch and working over common view models.
Luckily my project (4 people working on it, and its commercial use for) not that big for now, so I decided to change View Model property names! (It is still lot work to do. Hundreds of view models to obfuscate their properties!!!) Thank you Asp.Net MVC !
There some ways in the links which I gave in question. But also if you still want to use the BindAlias attribute, I can only suggest you to use the following extension methods. At least you dont have to write same alias string which you write in BindAlias attribute.
Here it is:
public static string AliasNameFor<TModel, TProperty>(this HtmlHelper<TModel> htmlHelper,
Expression<Func<TModel, TProperty>> expression)
{
var memberExpression = ExpressionHelpers.GetMemberExpression(expression);
if (memberExpression == null)
throw new InvalidOperationException("Expression must be a member expression");
var aliasAttr = memberExpression.Member.GetAttribute<BindAliasAttribute>();
if (aliasAttr != null)
{
return MvcHtmlString.Create(aliasAttr.Alias).ToHtmlString();
}
return htmlHelper.NameFor(expression).ToHtmlString();
}
public static string AliasIdFor<TModel, TProperty>(this HtmlHelper<TModel> htmlHelper,
Expression<Func<TModel, TProperty>> expression)
{
var memberExpression = ExpressionHelpers.GetMemberExpression(expression);
if (memberExpression == null)
throw new InvalidOperationException("Expression must be a member expression");
var aliasAttr = memberExpression.Member.GetAttribute<BindAliasAttribute>();
if (aliasAttr != null)
{
return MvcHtmlString.Create(TagBuilder.CreateSanitizedId(aliasAttr.Alias)).ToHtmlString();
}
return htmlHelper.IdFor(expression).ToHtmlString();
}
public static T GetAttribute<T>(this ICustomAttributeProvider provider)
where T : Attribute
{
var attributes = provider.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(T), true);
return attributes.Length > 0 ? attributes[0] as T : null;
}
public static MemberExpression GetMemberExpression<TModel, TProperty>(Expression<Func<TModel, TProperty>> expression)
{
MemberExpression memberExpression;
if (expression.Body is UnaryExpression)
{
var unaryExpression = (UnaryExpression)expression.Body;
memberExpression = (MemberExpression)unaryExpression.Operand;
}
else
{
memberExpression = (MemberExpression)expression.Body;
}
return memberExpression;
}
When you want to use it:
[ModelBinder(typeof(AliasModelBinder))]
public class FilterViewModel
{
[BindAlias("someText")]
public string FilterParameter { get; set; }
}
In html:
#* at least you dont write "someText" here again *#
#Html.Editor(Html.AliasNameFor(model => model.FilterParameter))
#Html.ValidationMessage(Html.AliasNameFor(model => model.FilterParameter))
So I am leaving this answer here like this. This is even not an answer (and there is no answer for MVC 5) but who searching in google for same problem might find useful this experience.
And here is the github repo: https://github.com/yusufuzun/so-view-model-bind-20869735

Web.Api deserialization fail for model parameter with different name

I've got one method, which take a model [AccountLinkRequest] as a parameter with url-encoded data. It's uses Json.NET by default, and also, I can't use the setting UseDataContractJsonSerializer = true cause I have generic output response model (in other methods)
[HttpPost]
public SomeResponse Link(AccountLinkRequest request)
{
if (request.CustomerId == null)
throw new Exception("Deserialization error here, pls help!");
// other actions
}
Here is my model class:
[DataContract]
[JsonObject]
public class AlertAccountLinkRequest
{
[DataMember(Name = "id")]
public string id { get; set; }
[DataMember(Name = "customer_id")]
[JsonProperty("customer_id")]
public string CustomerId { get; set; }
}
The problem: request.CustomerId is allways null. The request is pretty simple:
web_service_URL/link?customer_id=customer_id&id=id (url-encoded)
if I use Customer_Id instead of CustomerId, everything will be fine, but I'm on a jedy-way. Thank you!
There is not a simple answer how to achieve that. For more details please read this:
How to bind to custom objects in action signatures in MVC/WebAPI
Summary:
Manually call the parse function inside of your Action
Use a TypeConverter to make the complex type be simple
Use a custom model binder
So, if you for instance create your 'SmartBinder' which is able to consume some attributes, you can get what you want. Out fo the box there is no functionality for that, just the naming conventions...

Iterating over an unknown IQueryable's properties?

Forgive me if this has been asked before; I couldn't find anything close after a few searches:
I'm trying to write an ActionFilter in MVC that will "intercept" an IQueryable and nullify all the parent-child relationships at runtime. I'm doing this because Linq does not serialize objects properly if they have parent-child relationships (it throws a circular reference error because the parent refers to the child, which refers back to the parent and so on), and I need the object serialized to Json for an Ajax call. I have tried marking the child relationship in the DBML file with a privacy status of internal, and while this fixes the serialization problem, it also hides the child members from the view engine when the page renders, causing another error to be thrown. So, by fixing one problem, I cause another.
The only thing that fixes both problems is to manually set the child members to null just before returning the serialization, but I'm trying to avoid doing that because it's cumbersome, not reusable, etc. I'd rather use an ActionFilter to inspect the IQueryable that is being serialized and nullify any members with a Type of EntitySet (how Foreign Keys/Associations are represented). However, I don't have much experience with Reflection and can't find any examples that illustrate how to do something like this. So... is this possible with Reflection? Is there a better way to accomplish the same thing? I'll post the relevant code tomorrow when I'm back at my work computer.
Thanks,
Daniel
As promised, the code:
[GridAction]
public ActionResult _GetGrid()
{
IQueryable<Form> result = formRepository.GetAll();
foreach (Form f in result)
{
f.LineItems = null;
f.Notes = null;
}
return View(new GridModel<Form> { Data = result });
}
An added wrinkle is that I'm using the new Telerik MVC Extensions, so I'm not actually serializing the Json myself -- I'm just returning the IQueryable in an IGridModel, and the action filter [GridAction] does the rest.
So, just in case anyone's curious, here's how I finally solved this problem: I modified Damien Guard's T4 template to include the attribute [ScriptIgnore] above entities of type Association. This lets the JSON serializer know to not bother serializing these, thus preventing the circular reference problem I was getting. The generated code ends up looking like this:
private EntitySet<LineItem> _LineItems;
[ScriptIgnore]
[Association(Name=#"Form_LineItem", Storage=#"_LineItems", ThisKey=#"Id", OtherKey=#"FormId")]
public EntitySet<LineItem> LineItems
{
get {
return _LineItems;
}
set {
_LineItems.Assign(value);
}
}
This fixes the serialization problem I was having without disabling the use of child tables through LINQ. The grid action on the controller ends up looking like this:
[GridAction]
public ActionResult _GetGrid()
{
return View(new GridModel<Form> { Data = formRepository.GetAll() });
}
There are two options, one is to ignore those properties during serialization using [XmlIgnore]. The other one is to nullify the properties using reflection.
Ignore in serialization, simple usage sample that shows how to use default value in serialization:
[Serializable]
public class MyClass
{
[XmlIgnore]
public int IgnoredVal { get; set; }
public int Val { get; set; }
}
public void UsageSample()
{
var xmlSerializer = new XmlSerializer(typeof(MyClass));
var memoryStream = new MemoryStream();
var toSerialize = new MyClass { IgnoredVal = 1, Val = 2 };
xmlSerializer.Serialize(memoryStream, toSerialize);
memoryStream.Position = 0;
var deserialize = (MyClass)xmlSerializer.Deserialize(memoryStream);
Assert.AreEqual(0, deserialize.IgnoredVal);
Assert.AreEqual(2, deserialize.Val);
}
Nullify with reflection, code sample:
public void NullifyEntitySetProperties(object obj)
{
var entitySetProperties = obj.GetType().GetProperties()
.Where(property => property.PropertyType == typeof(EntitySet));
foreach (var property in entitySetProperties)
{
property.SetValue(obj, null, null);
}
}
In my opinion, if the first option can be done used in your code it's better. This option is more direct and economic.

How to format some ASP.NET MVC Json result?

i've got a really simple POCO (business) object which I'm returning to the client as some json, using ASP.NET MVC.
eg. (please ignore the lack of error checking, etc).
public JsonAction Index()
{
Foo myFoo = MyService();
return Json(myFoo);
}
kewl. Now, this object includes following public properties...
public class Foo
{
public decimal Score { get; set; }
public Dictionary<string, string> KeyValues { get; set; }
}
Now when the object is serialized into json, the decimal score has a precision of 7 (and i'm after a precision of 2) and the KeyValues might be null. If it's null, the the json looks like this...
"KeyValues" : null
I was hoping to have the KeyValues NOT be included in the json, if it's null.
Are there any tricks to helping format this json output? Or do i need to manually do this .. make my own string .. then return it as .. i donno .. a ContentAction? (eeks).
please help!
The ASP.Net MVC Json() method uses the JavascriptSerializer internally to do it's encoding. There are some options to control the serialization of your classes by creating and registering your own JavascriptConverter objects.

ASP.NET MVC ViewModel mapping with custom formatting

The project I'm working on has a large number of currency properties in the domain model and I'm needing for format these as $#,###.## for transmitting to and from the view. I've had a view thoughts as to different approaches which could be used. One approach could be to format the values explicitly inside the view, as in "Pattern 1" from Steve Michelotti :
<%= string.Format("{0:c}",
Model.CurrencyProperty) %>
...but this starts violating DRY principle very quickly.
The preferred approach appears to be to do the formatting during the mapping between DomainModel and a ViewModel (as per ASP.NET MVC in Action section 4.4.1 and "Pattern 3"). Using AutoMapper, this will result in some code like the following:
[TestFixture]
public class ViewModelTests
{
[Test]
public void DomainModelMapsToViewModel()
{
var domainModel = new DomainModel {CurrencyProperty = 19.95m};
var viewModel = new ViewModel(domainModel);
Assert.That(viewModel.CurrencyProperty, Is.EqualTo("$19.95"));
}
}
public class DomainModel
{
public decimal CurrencyProperty { get; set; }
}
public class ViewModel
{
///<summary>Currency Property - formatted as $#,###.##</summary>
public string CurrencyProperty { get; set; }
///<summary>Setup mapping between domain and view model</summary>
static ViewModel()
{
// map dm to vm
Mapper.CreateMap<DomainModel, ViewModel>()
.ForMember(vm => vm.CurrencyProperty, mc => mc.AddFormatter<CurrencyFormatter>());
}
/// <summary> Creates the view model from the domain model.</summary>
public ViewModel(DomainModel domainModel)
{
Mapper.Map(domainModel, this);
}
public ViewModel() { }
}
public class CurrencyFormatter : IValueFormatter
{
///<summary>Formats source value as currency</summary>
public string FormatValue(ResolutionContext context)
{
return string.Format(CultureInfo.CurrentCulture, "{0:c}", context.SourceValue);
}
}
Using IValueFormatter this way works great. Now, how to map it back from the DomainModel to ViewModel? I've tried using a custom class CurrencyResolver : ValueResolver<string,decimal>
public class CurrencyResolver : ValueResolver<string, decimal>
{
///<summary>Parses source value as currency</summary>
protected override decimal ResolveCore(string source)
{
return decimal.Parse(source, NumberStyles.Currency, CultureInfo.CurrentCulture);
}
}
And then mapped it with:
// from vm to dm
Mapper.CreateMap<ViewModel, DomainModel>()
.ForMember(dm => dm.CurrencyProperty,
mc => mc
.ResolveUsing<CurrencyResolver>()
.FromMember(vm => vm.CurrencyProperty));
Which will satisfy this test:
///<summary>DomainModel maps to ViewModel</summary>
[Test]
public void ViewModelMapsToDomainModel()
{
var viewModel = new ViewModel {CurrencyProperty = "$19.95"};
var domainModel = new DomainModel();
Mapper.Map(viewModel, domainModel);
Assert.That(domainModel.CurrencyProperty, Is.EqualTo(19.95m));
}
... But I'm feeling that I shouldn't need to explicitly define which property it is being mapped from with FromMember after doing ResolveUsing since the properties have the same name - is there a better way to define this mapping? As I mentioned, there are a good number of properties with currency values that will need to be mapped in this fashion.
That being said - is there a way I could have these mappings automatically resolved by defining some rule globally? The ViewModel properties are already decorated with DataAnnotation attributes [DataType(DataType.Currency)] for validation, so I was hoping that I could define some rule that does:
if (destinationProperty.PropertyInfo.Attributes.Has(DataType(DataType.Currency))
then Mapper.Use<CurrencyFormatter>()
if (sourceProperty.PropertyInfo.Attributes.Has(DataType(DataType.Currency))
then Mapper.Use<CurrencyResolver>()
... so that I can minimize the amount of boilerplate setup for each of the object types.
I'm also interested in hearing of any alternate strategies for accomplishing custom formatting to-and-from the View.
From ASP.NET MVC in Action:
At first we might be tempted to pass
this simple object straight to the
view, but the DateTime? properties
[in the Model] will cause problems.
For instance, we need to choose a
formatting for them such as
ToShortDateString() or ToString(). The
view would be forced to do null
checking to keep the screen from
blowing up when the properties are
null. Views are difficult to unit
test, so we want to keep them as thin
as possible. Because the output of a
view is a string passed to the
response stream, we’ll only use
objects that are stringfriendly; that
is, objects that will never fail when
ToString() is called on them. The
ConferenceForm view model object is an
example of this. Notice in listing
4.14 that all of the properties are strings. We’ll have the dates properly
formatted before this view model
object is placed in view data. This
way, the view need not consider the
object, and it can format the
information properly.
Have you considered using an extension method to format money?
public static string ToMoney( this decimal source )
{
return string.Format( "{0:c}", source );
}
<%= Model.CurrencyProperty.ToMoney() %>
Since this is clearly a view-related (not model-related) issue, I'd try to keep it in the view if at all possible. This basically moves it to an extension method on decimal, but the usage is in the view. You could also do an HtmlHelper extension:
public static string FormatMoney( this HtmlHelper helper, decimal amount )
{
return string.Format( "{0:c}", amount );
}
<%= Html.FormatMoney( Model.CurrencyProperty ) %>
If you liked that style better. It is somewhat more View-related as it's an HtmlHelper extension.
Have you considered putting a DisplayFormat on your ViewModel? That is what I use and it's quick and simple.
ViewModel :
[DisplayFormat(DataFormatString = "{0:c}", ApplyFormatInEditMode = true)]
public decimal CurrencyProperty { get; set; }
View :
#Html.DisplayFor(m => m.CurrencyProperty)
A custom TypeConverter is what you're looking for:
Mapper.CreateMap<string, decimal>().ConvertUsing<MoneyToDecimalConverter>();
Then create the converter:
public class MoneyToDecimalConverter : TypeConverter<string, decimal>
{
protected override decimal ConvertCore(string source)
{
// magic here to convert from string to decimal
}
}

Resources