I've noticed that when I register my dependencies via named overrides Dependency Resolver struggles to resolve components properly. Seems like the first instance is provided. Everything is fine with ctor injection.
Example:
Registration
RegisterProvider<IAccountProvider, AccountProvider>();
RegisterProvider<IAccountProvider, CustomAccountProvider>("customAccountProvider");
Resolution
var instance = DependecyResolver.Current.GetService<IAccountProvider>();
Cannot retrieve customAccountProvider instance.
It always refers to the first registered component ignoring named constraints.
When you have multiple implementations of the same component you have to name them or mark them with marking interface. Here is a code example with naming the instances :
using System;
using System.Linq;
using System.Reflection;
using Castle.Facilities.TypedFactory;
using Castle.MicroKernel;
using Castle.MicroKernel.Registration;
using Castle.Windsor;
namespace ResolvingNamedInctances
{
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var container = new WindsorContainer();
container.AddFacility<TypedFactoryFacility>();
container.Register(Component.For<ITypedFactoryComponentSelector>().ImplementedBy<AccountProviderTypeSelector>());
container.Register(Component.For<IAccountProviderSelector>().AsFactory(typeof(AccountProviderTypeSelector)));
container.Register(Component.For<IAccountProvider>().ImplementedBy<DefaultAccountProvider>().Named("default"));
container.Register(Component.For<IAccountProvider>().ImplementedBy<CustomAccountProvider>().Named("custom"));
// uncomment this line in MVC app and use DependencyResolver instead of container
//DependencyResolver.SetResolver(new WindsorDependencyResolver(container.Kernel));
var accountProviderSelector = container.Resolve<IAccountProviderSelector>();
var defaultAccountProvider = accountProviderSelector.GetAccountProvider(); // default
defaultAccountProvider.Provide();
var customAccountProvider = accountProviderSelector.GetAccountProvider("custom");
customAccountProvider.Provide();
Console.ReadLine();
}
}
public class AccountProviderTypeSelector : ITypedFactoryComponentSelector
{
public Func<IKernelInternal, IReleasePolicy, object> SelectComponent(MethodInfo method, Type type, object[] arguments)
{
string providerName = arguments.Length > 0 ? (string)arguments[0] : "default";
return (k, r) => k.GetHandlers(typeof(IAccountProvider))
.Where(
h =>
{
return h.ComponentModel.Name == providerName;
})
.Select(h => (IAccountProvider)k.Resolve(
h.ComponentModel.Name,
typeof(IAccountProvider),
new Arguments { },
r))
.FirstOrDefault();
}
}
public interface IAccountProviderSelector
{
IAccountProvider GetAccountProvider();
IAccountProvider GetAccountProvider(string nameIdentifier);
}
public interface IAccountProvider
{
void Provide();
}
public class DefaultAccountProvider : IAccountProvider
{
public void Provide()
{
Console.WriteLine("Working in default AccountProvider");
}
}
public class CustomAccountProvider : IAccountProvider
{
public void Provide()
{
Console.WriteLine("Working in standart CustomAccountProvider");
}
}
}
Within MVC Web Application DbContext binding work properly with InRequestScope()
kernel.Bind<DbContext>().ToSelf().InRequestScope();
kernel.Bind<IUnitOfWork<DbContext>>().To<UnitOfWork<DbContext>>();
But from a Task Scheduler call DbContext in InRequestScope() unable to update Db Table (without any error), until I change Binding to InSingletonScope() OR InThreadScope()
Question: So is their any way change scope to InSingletonScope() / InThreadScope() for a Task Scheduler Call. ?
// For Task Scheduler Call, I tried bellow bind, but not working properly
kernel.Bind<DbContext>().ToSelf()
.When(request => request.Target.Type.Namespace.StartsWith("NameSpace.ClassName"))
.InSingletonScope();
** And probably I miss some thing. Need help.
Code Snippet Updated
#region Commented Code
public EmailTask() : this
( DependencyResolver.Current.GetService<IMessageManager>(),
, DependencyResolver.Current.GetService<IUnitOfWork<DbContext>>()) { }
#endregion
public EmailTask(IMessageManager messageManager, IUnitOfWork<DbContext> unitOfWork)
{
this._messageManager = messageManager;
this._unitOfWork = unitOfWork;
ProcessEmail();
}
public class NonRequestScopedParameter : IParameter { ... }
public void ProcessEmail()
{
var temp = SomeRepository.GetAll();
SendEmail(temp);
temp.Date = DateTime.Now;
SomeRepository.Update(temp);
unitOfWork.Commit();
}
public class ExecuteEmailTask : ITask
{
private readonly IResolutionRoot _resolutionRoot;
private int _maxTries = 5;
public ExecuteEmailTask(IResolutionRoot resolutionRoot)
{
_resolutionRoot = resolutionRoot;
}
public void Execute(XmlNode node)
{
XmlAttribute attribute1 = node.Attributes["maxTries"];
if (attribute1 != null && !String.IsNullOrEmpty(attribute1.Value))
{
this._maxTries = int.Parse(attribute1.Value);
}
/// send email messages
var task = _resolutionRoot.Get<EmailTask>(new NonRequestScopedParameter());
}
}
In Web.Config
<ScheduleTasks>
<Thread seconds="60">
<task name="ExecuteEmailTask" type="namespace.ExecuteEmailTask, AssemblyName" enabled="true" stopOnError="false" maxTries="5"/>
</Thread>
</ScheduleTasks>
In Global.asax
protected void Application_Start()
{
/* intialize Task */
TaskConfig.Init();
TaskManager.Instance.Initialize(TaskConfig.ScheduleTasks);
TaskManager.Instance.Start();
}
Ninject Bind Syntax
kernel.Bind<DbContext>().ToSelf().InRequestScope(); // Default bind
kernel.Bind<DbContext>().ToSelf()
.When(x => x.Parameters.OfType<NonRequestScopedParameter>().Any())
.InCallScope(); // For Scheduler
Note: EmailTask class also have SomeReposity as a Constructor Argument.
Queries:-
But what is the bind syntax to resolve TaskScheduler(IResolutionRoot resolutionRoot) ?
What is the configuration code to run TaskScheduler ?
As say to put IFakeDbContext directly into constructor, can this work with IUnitOfWork<FakeDbContext> ?
Problem
Task unable to call with Overloaded Constructor , it is only able to call TaskScheduler default Constructor.
Question 4: Can any way to invoke TaskScheduler(IResolutionRoot resolutionRoot) from TaskScheduler default constructor ?
Sample Code Snippet to create Task & run using System.Threading.Timer
private ITask createTask()
{
if (this.Enabled && (this._task == null))
{
if (this._taskType != null)
{
this._task = Activator.CreateInstance(this._taskType) as ITask;
}
this._enabled = this._task != null;
}
return this._task;
}
Question 5: Can I resolve TaskScheduler(IResolutionRoot resolutionRoot) here ?
Solved
public ExecuteEmailTask() :
this(DependencyResolver.Current.GetService<IResolutionRoot>())
OR
public ExecuteEmailTask() : this(new Bootstrapper().Kernel) { }
public ExecuteEmailTask(IResolutionRoot resolutionRoot)
{
_resolutionRoot = resolutionRoot;
}
First of, you should note that InSingletonScope() is usually a bad idea for DbContext's/Sessions. What happens if some other service changes data in the meantime? I would recommend investigating what effects this has.
For the scenario you first described, a correctly formulated .When(...) should work.
As an alternative to the .When(...) binding you could also use a .Named("FooBar") binding.
The constructor of the scheduled task would then need to look like:
ctor(Named["FooBar"] DbContext dbContext);
However, note, that this only (easily) works in case you need to inject the DbContext into a single constructor. If the task features dependencies and these need the same DbContext instance, too, it gets a bit tricker.
Since you updated your answer and say that this is the case, i would recommend an entirely different approach: Using a request parameter as basis for the When(...) condition combined with InCallScope binding. See below for an example.
Brace yourself, this is ab it of code :) The implementation requires the ninject.extensions.NamedScope extension (nuget).
I've also used xUnit and FluentAssertions nuget packages to execute the tests.
public class Test
{
// the two implementations are just for demonstration and easy verification purposes. You will only use one DbContext type.
public interface IFakeDbContext { }
public class RequestScopeDbContext : IFakeDbContext { }
public class CallScopeDbContext : IFakeDbContext { }
public class SomeTask
{
public IFakeDbContext FakeDbContext { get; set; }
public Dependency1 Dependency1 { get; set; }
public Dependency2 Dependency2 { get; set; }
public SomeTask(IFakeDbContext fakeDbContext, Dependency1 dependency1, Dependency2 dependency2)
{
FakeDbContext = fakeDbContext;
Dependency1 = dependency1;
Dependency2 = dependency2;
}
}
public class Dependency1
{
public IFakeDbContext FakeDbContext { get; set; }
public Dependency1(IFakeDbContext fakeDbContext)
{
FakeDbContext = fakeDbContext;
}
}
public class Dependency2
{
public IFakeDbContext FakeDbContext { get; set; }
public Dependency2(IFakeDbContext fakeDbContext)
{
FakeDbContext = fakeDbContext;
}
}
public class TaskScheduler
{
private readonly IResolutionRoot _resolutionRoot;
public TaskScheduler(IResolutionRoot resolutionRoot)
{
_resolutionRoot = resolutionRoot;
}
public SomeTask CreateScheduledTaskNow()
{
return _resolutionRoot.Get<SomeTask>(new NonRequestScopedParameter());
}
}
public class NonRequestScopedParameter : Ninject.Parameters.IParameter
{
public bool Equals(IParameter other)
{
if (other == null)
{
return false;
}
return other is NonRequestScopedParameter;
}
public object GetValue(IContext context, ITarget target)
{
throw new NotSupportedException("this parameter does not provide a value");
}
public string Name
{
get { return typeof(NonRequestScopedParameter).Name; }
}
// this is very important
public bool ShouldInherit
{
get { return true; }
}
}
[Fact]
public void FactMethodName()
{
var kernel = new StandardKernel();
// this is the default binding
kernel.Bind<IFakeDbContext>().To<RequestScopeDbContext>();
// this binding is _only_ used when the request contains a NonRequestScopedParameter
// in call scope means, that all objects built in the a single request get the same instance
kernel.Bind<IFakeDbContext>().To<CallScopeDbContext>()
.When(x => x.Parameters.OfType<NonRequestScopedParameter>().Any())
.InCallScope();
// let's try it out!
var task = kernel.Get<SomeTask>(new NonRequestScopedParameter());
// verify that the correct binding was used
task.FakeDbContext.Should().BeOfType<CallScopeDbContext>();
// verify that all children of the task get injected the same task instance
task.FakeDbContext.Should()
.Be(task.Dependency1.FakeDbContext)
.And.Be(task.Dependency2.FakeDbContext);
}
}
Since, as you say, the task scheduler does not make use of the IoC to create the task, it only supports a parameterless constructor. In that case you can make use DependencyResolver.Current (however, note that i'm in no way an expert on asp.net /MVC so i'm not making any claims that this is thread safe or working 100% reliably):
public class TaskExecutor : ITask
{
public TaskExecutor()
: this(DependencyResolver.Current.GetService<IResolutionRoot>())
{}
internal TaskExecutor(IResolutionRoot resolutionRoot)
{
this.resolutionRoot = resolutionRoot;
}
public void Execute()
{
IFooTask actualTask = this.resolution.Get<IFooTask>(new NonRequestScopedParameter());
actualTask.Execute();
}
}
My DbContext implementation implements two interfaces.
I'm trying to follow best practices and instantiate one DbContext instance per HTTP request.
However, I have a controller action where I need to instantiate two classes, each of which takes different interface in constructor.
I am worried if in that scenario, for that specific action, two DbContext instances would be raised.
I've setup my ContainerBuilder like this:
builder.RegisterType<MyDbContext>()
.As<IWorkflowPersistenceStore>()
.As<IDocumentPersistenceStore>()
.InstancePerHttpRequest();
builder.RegisterType<WorkflowManager>().As<IWorkflowManager>().InstancePerHttpRequest();
builder.RegisterType<DocumentManager>().As<IDocumentManager>().InstancePerHttpRequest();
public class OperationController : Controller
{
private IWorkflowManager _workflowManager;
private IDocumentManager _documentManager;
public OperationController(IWorkflowManager workflowManager, IDocumentManager documentManager)
{
_workflowManager = workflowManager;
_documentManager = documentManager;
}
public ActionResult SaveWorkflowDocument(...)
{
// will my managers point to same DbContext?
_workflowManager.DoSomething(...);
_documentManager.DoSomethingElse(...);
return View();
}
}
public class WorkflowManager : IWorkflowManager
{
private IWorkflowPersistenceStore _store;
public WorkflowManager(IWorkflowPersistenceStore store)
{
_store = store;
}
}
public class DocumentManager : IDocumentManager
{
private IDocumentPersistenceStore _store;
public DocumentManager (IDocumentPersistenceStore store)
{
_store = store;
}
}
Is this good enough?
Do I have to add .SingleInstance()? I'm worried that it might create singleton for whole application.
I think you're ok with what you have. Test passes:
using Autofac;
using NUnit.Framework;
namespace AutofacTest
{
[TestFixture]
public class ScopeTest
{
[Test]
public void Test()
{
var builder = new ContainerBuilder();
builder.RegisterType<Component>()
.As<IServiceA>()
.As<IServiceB>()
.InstancePerLifetimeScope();
using (var container = builder.Build())
using (var scope = container.BeginLifetimeScope())
{
var a = scope.Resolve<IServiceA>();
var b = scope.Resolve<IServiceB>();
Assert.AreEqual(a, b);
}
}
}
public interface IServiceA { }
public interface IServiceB { }
public class Component : IServiceA, IServiceB { }
}
I'm using AutoMapper in an ASP.NET MVC application. I was told that I should move the AutoMapper.CreateMap elsewhere as they have a lot of overhead. I'm not too sure how to design my application to put these calls in just 1 place.
I have a web layer, service layer and a data layer. Each a project of its own. I use Ninject to DI everything. I'll utilize AutoMapper in both web and service layers.
So what are your setup for AutoMapper's CreateMap? Where do you put it? How do you call it?
Doesn't matter, as long as it's a static class. It's all about convention.
Our convention is that each "layer" (web, services, data) has a single file called AutoMapperXConfiguration.cs, with a single method called Configure(), where X is the layer.
The Configure() method then calls private methods for each area.
Here's an example of our web tier config:
public static class AutoMapperWebConfiguration
{
public static void Configure()
{
ConfigureUserMapping();
ConfigurePostMapping();
}
private static void ConfigureUserMapping()
{
Mapper.CreateMap<User,UserViewModel>();
}
// ... etc
}
We create a method for each "aggregate" (User, Post), so things are separated nicely.
Then your Global.asax:
AutoMapperWebConfiguration.Configure();
AutoMapperServicesConfiguration.Configure();
AutoMapperDomainConfiguration.Configure();
// etc
It's kind of like an "interface of words" - can't enforce it, but you expect it, so you can code (and refactor) if necessary.
EDIT:
Just thought I'd mention that I now use AutoMapper profiles, so the above example becomes:
public static class AutoMapperWebConfiguration
{
public static void Configure()
{
Mapper.Initialize(cfg =>
{
cfg.AddProfile(new UserProfile());
cfg.AddProfile(new PostProfile());
});
}
}
public class UserProfile : Profile
{
protected override void Configure()
{
Mapper.CreateMap<User,UserViewModel>();
}
}
Much cleaner/more robust.
You can really put it anywhere as long as your web project references the assembly that it is in. In your situation I would put it in the service layer as that will be accessible by the web layer and the service layer and later if you decide to do a console app or you are doing a unit test project the mapping configuration will be available from those projects as well.
In your Global.asax you will then call the method that sets all of your maps. See below:
File AutoMapperBootStrapper.cs
public static class AutoMapperBootStrapper
{
public static void BootStrap()
{
AutoMapper.CreateMap<Object1, Object2>();
// So on...
}
}
Global.asax on application start
just call
AutoMapperBootStrapper.BootStrap();
Now some people will argue against this method violates some SOLID principles, which they have valid arguments. Here they are for the reading.
Configuring Automapper in Bootstrapper violates Open-Closed Principle?
Update: The approach posted here is no more valid as SelfProfiler has been removed as of AutoMapper v2.
I would take a similar approach as Thoai. But I would use the built-in SelfProfiler<> class to handle the maps, then use the Mapper.SelfConfigure function to initialize.
Using this object as the source:
public class User
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string FirstName { get; set; }
public string LastName { get; set; }
public DateTime BirthDate { get; set; }
public string GetFullName()
{
return string.Format("{0} {1}", FirstName, LastName);
}
}
And these as the destination:
public class UserViewModel
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string FirstName { get; set; }
public string LastName { get; set; }
}
public class UserWithAgeViewModel
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string FullName { get; set; }
public int Age { get; set; }
}
You can create these profiles:
public class UserViewModelProfile : SelfProfiler<User,UserViewModel>
{
protected override void DescribeConfiguration(IMappingExpression<User, UserViewModel> map)
{
//This maps by convention, so no configuration needed
}
}
public class UserWithAgeViewModelProfile : SelfProfiler<User, UserWithAgeViewModel>
{
protected override void DescribeConfiguration(IMappingExpression<User, UserWithAgeViewModel> map)
{
//This map needs a little configuration
map.ForMember(d => d.Age, o => o.MapFrom(s => DateTime.Now.Year - s.BirthDate.Year));
}
}
To initialize in your application, create this class
public class AutoMapperConfiguration
{
public static void Initialize()
{
Mapper.Initialize(x=>
{
x.SelfConfigure(typeof (UserViewModel).Assembly);
// add assemblies as necessary
});
}
}
Add this line to your global.asax.cs file: AutoMapperConfiguration.Initialize()
Now you can place your mapping classes where they make sense to you and not worry about one monolithic mapping class.
For those of you who adhere to the following:
using an ioc container
don't like to break open closed for this
don't like a monolithic config file
I did a combo between profiles and leveraging my ioc container:
IoC configuration:
public class Automapper : IWindsorInstaller
{
public void Install(IWindsorContainer container, IConfigurationStore store)
{
container.Register(Classes.FromThisAssembly().BasedOn<Profile>().WithServiceBase());
container.Register(Component.For<IMappingEngine>().UsingFactoryMethod(k =>
{
Profile[] profiles = k.ResolveAll<Profile>();
Mapper.Initialize(cfg =>
{
foreach (var profile in profiles)
{
cfg.AddProfile(profile);
}
});
profiles.ForEach(k.ReleaseComponent);
return Mapper.Engine;
}));
}
}
Configuration example:
public class TagStatusViewModelMappings : Profile
{
protected override void Configure()
{
Mapper.CreateMap<Service.Contracts.TagStatusViewModel, TagStatusViewModel>();
}
}
Usage example:
public class TagStatusController : ApiController
{
private readonly IFooService _service;
private readonly IMappingEngine _mapper;
public TagStatusController(IFooService service, IMappingEngine mapper)
{
_service = service;
_mapper = mapper;
}
[Route("")]
public HttpResponseMessage Get()
{
var response = _service.GetTagStatus();
return Request.CreateResponse(HttpStatusCode.Accepted, _mapper.Map<List<ViewModels.TagStatusViewModel>>(response));
}
}
The trade-off is that you have to reference the Mapper by the IMappingEngine interface instead of the static Mapper, but that's a convention I can live with.
All of above solutions provide a static method to call (from app_start or any where) that it should call other methods to configure parts of mapping-configuration. But, if you have a modular application, that modules may plug in and out of application at any time, these solutions does not work. I suggest using WebActivator library that can register some methods to run on app_pre_start and app_post_start any where:
// in MyModule1.dll
public class InitMapInModule1 {
static void Init() {
Mapper.CreateMap<User, UserViewModel>();
// other stuffs
}
}
[assembly: PreApplicationStartMethod(typeof(InitMapInModule1), "Init")]
// in MyModule2.dll
public class InitMapInModule2 {
static void Init() {
Mapper.CreateMap<Blog, BlogViewModel>();
// other stuffs
}
}
[assembly: PreApplicationStartMethod(typeof(InitMapInModule2), "Init")]
// in MyModule3.dll
public class InitMapInModule3 {
static void Init() {
Mapper.CreateMap<Comment, CommentViewModel>();
// other stuffs
}
}
[assembly: PreApplicationStartMethod(typeof(InitMapInModule2), "Init")]
// and in other libraries...
You can install WebActivator via NuGet.
In addition to the best answer, a good way is using Autofac IoC liberary to add some automation. With this you just define your profiles regardless of initiations.
public static class MapperConfig
{
internal static void Configure()
{
var myAssembly = Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly();
var builder = new ContainerBuilder();
builder.RegisterAssemblyTypes(myAssembly)
.Where(t => t.IsSubclassOf(typeof(Profile))).As<Profile>();
var container = builder.Build();
using (var scope = container.BeginLifetimeScope())
{
var profiles = container.Resolve<IEnumerable<Profile>>();
foreach (var profile in profiles)
{
Mapper.Initialize(cfg =>
{
cfg.AddProfile(profile);
});
}
}
}
}
and calling this line in Application_Start method:
MapperConfig.Configure();
The above code finds all Profile sub classes and initiate them automatically.
Putting all the mapping logic in 1 location is not a good practice for me. Because the mapping class will be extremely large and very hard to maintain.
I recommend put the mapping stuff together with the ViewModel class in the same cs file. You can easily navigate to the mapping definition you want following this convention. Moreover, while creating the mapping class, you can reference to the ViewModel properties faster since they are in the same file.
So your view model class will look like:
public class UserViewModel
{
public ObjectId Id { get; set; }
public string Firstname { get; set; }
public string Lastname { get; set; }
public string Email { get; set; }
public string Password { get; set; }
}
public class UserViewModelMapping : IBootStrapper // Whatever
{
public void Start()
{
Mapper.CreateMap<User, UserViewModel>();
}
}
From new version of AutoMapper using static method Mapper.Map() is deprecated. So you can add MapperConfiguration as static property to MvcApplication (Global.asax.cs) and use it to create instance of Mapper.
App_Start
public class MapperConfig
{
public static MapperConfiguration MapperConfiguration()
{
return new MapperConfiguration(_ =>
{
_.AddProfile(new FileProfile());
_.AddProfile(new ChartProfile());
});
}
}
Global.asax.cs
public class MvcApplication : System.Web.HttpApplication
{
internal static MapperConfiguration MapperConfiguration { get; private set; }
protected void Application_Start()
{
MapperConfiguration = MapperConfig.MapperConfiguration();
...
}
}
BaseController.cs
public class BaseController : Controller
{
//
// GET: /Base/
private IMapper _mapper = null;
protected IMapper Mapper
{
get
{
if (_mapper == null) _mapper = MvcApplication.MapperConfiguration.CreateMapper();
return _mapper;
}
}
}
https://github.com/AutoMapper/AutoMapper/wiki/Migrating-from-static-API
For those who are (lost) using:
WebAPI 2
SimpleInjector 3.1
AutoMapper 4.2.1 (With Profiles)
Here's how I managed integrating AutoMapper in the "new way". Also,
a Huge thanks to this answer(and question)
1 - Created a folder in the WebAPI project called "ProfileMappers". In this folder I place all my profiles classes which creates my mappings:
public class EntityToViewModelProfile : Profile
{
protected override void Configure()
{
CreateMap<User, UserViewModel>();
}
public override string ProfileName
{
get
{
return this.GetType().Name;
}
}
}
2 - In my App_Start, I have a SimpleInjectorApiInitializer which configures my SimpleInjector container:
public static Container Initialize(HttpConfiguration httpConfig)
{
var container = new Container();
container.Options.DefaultScopedLifestyle = new WebApiRequestLifestyle();
//Register Installers
Register(container);
container.RegisterWebApiControllers(GlobalConfiguration.Configuration);
//Verify container
container.Verify();
//Set SimpleInjector as the Dependency Resolver for the API
GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.DependencyResolver =
new SimpleInjectorWebApiDependencyResolver(container);
httpConfig.DependencyResolver = new SimpleInjectorWebApiDependencyResolver(container);
return container;
}
private static void Register(Container container)
{
container.Register<ISingleton, Singleton>(Lifestyle.Singleton);
//Get all my Profiles from the assembly (in my case was the webapi)
var profiles = from t in typeof(SimpleInjectorApiInitializer).Assembly.GetTypes()
where typeof(Profile).IsAssignableFrom(t)
select (Profile)Activator.CreateInstance(t);
//add all profiles found to the MapperConfiguration
var config = new MapperConfiguration(cfg =>
{
foreach (var profile in profiles)
{
cfg.AddProfile(profile);
}
});
//Register IMapper instance in the container.
container.Register<IMapper>(() => config.CreateMapper(container.GetInstance));
//If you need the config for LinqProjections, inject also the config
//container.RegisterSingleton<MapperConfiguration>(config);
}
3 - Startup.cs
//Just call the Initialize method on the SimpleInjector class above
var container = SimpleInjectorApiInitializer.Initialize(configuration);
4 - Then, in your controller just inject as usually a IMapper interface:
private readonly IMapper mapper;
public AccountController( IMapper mapper)
{
this.mapper = mapper;
}
//Using..
var userEntity = mapper.Map<UserViewModel, User>(entity);
For vb.net programmers using the new Version (5.x) of AutoMapper.
Global.asax.vb:
Public Class MvcApplication
Inherits System.Web.HttpApplication
Protected Sub Application_Start()
AutoMapperConfiguration.Configure()
End Sub
End Class
AutoMapperConfiguration:
Imports AutoMapper
Module AutoMapperConfiguration
Public MapperConfiguration As IMapper
Public Sub Configure()
Dim config = New MapperConfiguration(
Sub(cfg)
cfg.AddProfile(New UserProfile())
cfg.AddProfile(New PostProfile())
End Sub)
MapperConfiguration = config.CreateMapper()
End Sub
End Module
Profiles:
Public Class UserProfile
Inherits AutoMapper.Profile
Protected Overrides Sub Configure()
Me.CreateMap(Of User, UserViewModel)()
End Sub
End Class
Mapping:
Dim ViewUser = MapperConfiguration.Map(Of UserViewModel)(User)
I have successfully setup a simple mvc application that lists teams. I'm using Ninject to inject the appropriate repository depending on the controller (thanks to stack overflow ;). All looks good, except that the repository code looks exactly the same. And I know that's wrong. So my TeamRepository has two classes (for now).
public class SwimTeamRepository : ITeamRepository<SwimTeam>
{
private readonly Table<SwimTeam> _teamTable;
public SwimTeamRepository(string connectionString)
{
_teamTable = (new DataContext(connectionString).GetTable<SwimTeam>());
}
public IQueryable<SwimTeam> Team
{
get { return _teamTable; }
}
}
public class SoccerTeamRepository : ITeamRepository<SoccerTeam>
{
private readonly Table<SoccerTeam> _teamTable;
public SoccerTeamRepository(string connectionString)
{
_teamTable = (new DataContext(connectionString).GetTable<SoccerTeam>());
}
public IQueryable<SoccerTeam> Team
{
get { return _teamTable; }
}
}
They look exactly the same except for the Class and Table name, so clearly I need to re-factor this. What would be the best approach here? Singleton? Factory Method?
Thanks in advance!
You could use generics:
public interface ITeamRepository<T>
{
}
public class TeamRepository<TTeam> : ITeamRepository<TTeam>
where TTeam : Team
{
private readonly Table<TTeam> _teamTable;
public TeamRepository(string connectionString)
{
_teamTable = (new DataContext(connectionString).GetTable<TTeam>());
}
public IQueryable<TTeam> Team
{
get { return _teamTable; }
}
}
public class Team
{
}
public class SwimTeam : Team
{
}
Then use it like so...
public void MyMethod()
{
var repository = new TeamRepository<SwimTeam>();
}
...and set up your IoC container w/ Ninject like so...
public class MyModule : NinjectModule
{
public override void Load()
{
Bind<ITeamRepository<SwimTeam>>
.To<TeamRepository<SwimTeam>>();
}
}
public void MyMethod()
{
var repository = kernel.Get<ITeamRepository<SwimTeam>>();
}
If you want to get REAL generic and have a single repository for ALL of your mapped classes, you can do something like this:
public interface IRepository
{
IQueryable<T> Get<T>() where T : class, new();
}
public class Repository : IRepository, IDisposable
{
private DataContext _dataContext;
public Repository(string connectionString)
{
_dataContext = new DataContext(connectionString);
}
public IQueryable<T> Get<T>()
where T : class, new()
{
return _dataContext.GetTable<T>().AsQueryable();
}
public void Dispose()
{
if (_dataContext != null)
{
_dataContext.Dispose();
_dataContext = null;
}
}
}
...which you could call like so (after setting up your Ninject container)...
using (var repository = kernel.Get<IRepository>())
{
var swimTeam = repository.Get<SwimTeam>();
}
Since Ninject takes care of the life-cycle management of your objects, you don't HAVE to wrap the repository in a using statement. In fact, you don't want to use a using statement there at all if you plan to use the repository more than once within the scope of its lifetime. Ninject will automatically dispose of it when it's life-cycle ends.
Here's a good article by Rob Conery on using this kind of technique to reduce the friction of using different ORMs.
EDIT by keeg:
I Think
public class TeamRepository<TTeam> : ITeamRepository<TTeam> where TTeam : Team {}
Should be
public class TeamRepository<TTeam> : ITeamRepository<TTeam> where TTeam : class {}
Please correct if I'm wrong.
Is this what you want?
public class TeamRepository : ITeamRepository<T>
{
private readonly Table<T> _teamTable;
public TeamRepository(string connectionString)
{
_teamTable = (new DataContext(connectionString).GetTable<T>());
}
public IQueryable<T> Team
{
get { return _teamTable; }
}
}