This is an embarrassingly basic n-tier question.
I've created a DAL project in VS2008 with subsonic. It's got a widget class, a widgetcollection class, and a widgetcontroller class.
I've created my Business logic project (no I can't put it in the same tier) that references it. Using certain business criteria, it selects a collection of widgets in a function that returns a widgetcollection.
My question is: how does my GUI layer bind the collection to a grid? I know that the widgetcollection is a valid datasource for a datagrid, but how does the GUI layer know what a widget and widgetcollection are? Surely I don't have to reference the DAL from the GUI, that negates the whole point.
Firstly, I dont think this is an embarrasingly basic n-tier question.
It is a very interesting subject and one I attempted to stimulate discussion for in the old Subsonic Forums.
I share your reluctance to expose my GUI layer to the DAL.
My GUI layer only talks to BLL using the vocabulary and topics of my own Entity Model and only returns my own entities or lists or in some cases Data Tables.
My BLL only talks to a MAPping layer which maps Fetches,Saves etc to the appropriate DAL CRUD methods and converts the returned Subsonic types to my Entity types.
In doing this I was suprised at how much of Subsonic I had to duplicate and at times I felt I was going down the wrong road, I am feeling more comfortable with it now, though it still needs refactoring and refining.
For example, finding a flexible, generic means of indicating to my BLL which row(s) I wanted returned in a fetch was a challenge I hadn't expected and I finished up writing a generic queryClass with fluent interface which looks a lot like a Subsonic Select.
FWIW, I think you are headed down the right track, I guess what you have to do though is decide how you want to define those Subsonic types to your GUI.
Rob has an interesting discussion you may be interested in.
(using SubSonic 2.x) In my BLL classes I have a property which gives an object reference to the relevant DAL class. My UI form has a reference to the BLL class, so from the form I can address the DAL properties and methods via .BLL.DAL.xxxx
FWIW, I have never managed to successfully bind a SubSonic collection to a DataGridView. As alternatives, I sometimes use the collections .ToTable() method to create a DataTable and then bind to that, or alternatively I manually bind using .AddRow()
Look at the documentation for IBindingList Interface in MSDN, it has a pretty good sample.
Create, for example, a CustomersList class in your model that uses a Customer class in your BLL. Bind the grid to an instance of the CustomersList class. The presentation layer has no knowledge of the subsonic table classes.
You probably need to use an Interface. You can easily create an interface based off of the Widget in your Dal(right click on the class and create an Interface from the class). Next take the Interface and add it to your Business Logic Layer or a seperate project just for interfaces. Once you have done that you can add a reference to the Interface both in the DAL and in the GUI. This can also help if you ever change your data storage from a Database to XML etc. etc.
Related
I have done a web site project in PHP using mySQL at school, which was not object oriented but that was in a manner on which I want to display my content. Then I changed the same project into object orientated classes where I use same CRUD queries in functions of that classes and they interact with a DBWrapper class. Or can say, I just cut the php content and pasted it into the functions and and call that functionality through object. that all was done without documentation. But now i am making a project in .net with documentation how ever its a web based app actually and i have the idea of getting data from database trough queries and o of course c# is different but CRUD is something which is similar in any language. so as i had decide first this thing will display and from thing the next this thing will display etc. about codding than how should i know my class diagram is the same as what i am getting and what that actually is. because i will connect both classes as i wnt to display . and plus is Do we write object of other class as an attribute of second class if that is going to use in it.
Most class diagrams I've seen and made include only the business model entities. Most of the time UML diagrams are used to communicate and document the workings of the system. I like to think of them as pseudo-code.
Please refer to this other question as well: https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/190429/what-classes-to-put-exactly-in-a-class-diagram
However, if you feel your implementation ended up with a lot of helper classes then it's probably good to review your system's structure to make sure you are coding "object oriented". Actually making the class diagram is supposed to help you realize what you can improve.
I suggest you also take a look at design patterns. This link might be useful, as you mention experience with C# http://www.dotnettricks.com/learn/designpatterns
I am designing my game with Entity/Component concepts of GameplayKit in iOS 9, for ShootComponent, should define bullet/missile as Entity?
Reason for Yes:
separate logic from its parent, e.g. playerTank or enemyTank;
if not, TankEntity need distinguish whether its bullet collide with other Entities or itself.
Reason for No:
it is not actual entity in logic world, which is fired by my tank or enemy turret;
bullet always be shot and disappeared, so game need add/remove it now and then;
For your comments pls.
Finally decided to define bullet/missile as entity, so it acts as entity in contact test, rendering and other components.
I would have add it as a component for the entity using it.
So you will be able to make any entity fire bullet or missile.
Keep in mind that your entity should only act as a simple reference with no logic in it.
First lets read Adam Martins original description of his terms. It appears Apple got the idea of entities and components from Martin:
Entity: The entity is a general-purpose object. Usually, it only consists of a unique id.
Component: the raw data for one aspect of the object, and how it interacts with the world.
System: "Each System runs continuously (as though each System had its own private thread) and performs global actions on every Entity that possesses a Component or Components that match that Systems query."
Martin is just defining terms for doing compositional design, which is an alternative to inheritance that is more recombinable and flexible.
So entities are what you might recognize as instances of a class, but classes have been stripped of all their data and methods, which has been moved out into components - and the entities just delegate to the components.
So your missile... it would be an instance of a class in normal OO terms - an object, right? And a missile can behave in a variety of ways... it can seek out an enemy, it can fly straight ahead, it can speed up, etc. It also has properties that indicate if it's hit an enemy, properties for its total damage, health, and so on.
So the missile is an entity while these various methods / data would be components of the missile entity.
Martins approach is interesting, and there hasn't been as much focus on compositional design as there has been OO (for what reason I don't really know), so I can see why Apple would adopt it for a game framework like this.
But his ideas don't seem very well fleshed out. For example, usually in compositional design there is a delegation hierarchy, where objects will keep delegating up a chain until some data or method is found. At the top there's one meta-object that everything delegates to. In this way objects are both components and entities - they act as both the delegating and the delegated to. But Martins terms don't support this... his model is flat - there are only entities, and then components that can be added to them, but no delegation between entities and no meta-object.
Maybe he felt this flat design was appropriate for game development. I have my doubts... you seem to want some kind of hierarchical structure of objects. I would look for a way to mix in inheritance, or setup some kind of custom delegation hierarchy where objects could act as both entities and components. You might look to see if this is possible within that framework, or if it isn't just write your own.
Please pardon the long-winded title to this post.
Basically, I have an entity model that was generated by Entity Framework 5 using the Database First method. Now I would like to develop those POCO entity classes by adding validation logic and anything else I might need to go in there. The problem... (and this is so glaring I can't believe I couldn't find any answer to this on the web)... is that any time my database schema should change and I use the "Update Model from Database" command from my model diagram, the POCO classes are re-generated and all custom code is lost.
As far as I understand, the "domain model" layer in an MVVM application is largely comprised of what EF generates (in database first approach), plus validation (perhaps implementing the IDataErrorInfo. But if this was the right way to do it, why would this be wiped away when using database-first model updates?
What am I missing?
Thanks
You should use partial classes. That is why they are there.
If you want to know the basics see this short example:
http://www.dotnetperls.com/partial
Here is more on partial classes from the msdn:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/vstudio/wa80x488.aspx
If you want to use your own namespaces in the genarted code, you can refer to this SO question:
Entity Framework 5 partial classes not working
I'm currently in a project where I have been asked to create a logical data model in UML. Now i've defined all my logical data entities and know all my attributes i'm just a little lost on how I can map these attributes to the UI.
The point of the exercise is to prove all the attributes in the requirements have been met in the system we have chosen to deploy. Happy to supply more information.
The application I am using is Enterprise Architect.
This question was solved the Enterprise Architect Support Forums.
Connect both classes with an association
Right click the assoc. near the class with attributes
Context menu/Link to Element Feature
Attributes
-> select the one and the assoc. is attached to it
There is an elegant approach which is to use Database stereotypes in your class diagram on attributes and then map it to java ORM annotation in the code.
I don't think EA can do this ORM mapping but other tools can.
Do you have artifacts in your model for the UI, too? That is, as a screen mock up or as a class model of the underlying UI classes? If yes, then you may find it very helpful to establish a traceability for your artifacts using a realization or dependency relationship.
You can further support that by creating requirement entities (in a SysML requirements diagram) and drag'n'drop the respective requirement onto the entity which provides a solution to it. This is described on page 31 in the following EA whitepaper: http://community.sparxsystems.com/whitepapers/Requirements%20Management%20with%20Enterprise%20Architect/Requirements_Management_in_Enterprise_Architect.pdf
I made a screenshot for you of how this looks, but unfortunately I am not yet allowed to post it here since I am a new member. Maybe you can get a rough idea from this screenshot I found on the web: http://www.sparxsystems.com.au/enterprise-architect/images/traceability_lg.png
That mechanism works on class level. On the attribute level you may want to add a link to specific related (requirements) elements in the notes field, if necessary.
I'm facing several problems trying to apply DDD with EF4 (in ASP MVC2 context). Your advaice would be greatly appreciated.
First of all, I started to use POCO because the dependacy on ObjectContext was not very comfortable in many situations.
Going to POCO solved some problems but the experience is not what I was used to with NHibernate.
I would like to know if it's possible to use designer and to generate not only entities but also a Value Objects (ComplexType?). If I mean Value Object is a class with one ctor without any set properties (T4 modification needed ?).
The only way I found to add behavior to anemic entities is to create partial classes that extends those generated by edmx. I'm not satisfied with this approach.
I don't know how to create several repositories with one edmx. For now I'm using a partial classes to group methods for each aggregate. Each group is a repository in fact.
The last question is about IQueryable. Should it be exposed outside the repository ? If I refer to the ble book, the repository should be a unit of execution and shouldn't expose something like IQueryable. What do you think ?
Thanks for your help.
Thomas
It's fine to use POCOs, but note that EntityObject doesn't require an ObjectContext.
Yes, Complex Types are value objects and yes, you can generate them in the designer. Select several properties of an entity, right click, and choose refactor into complex type.
I strongly recommend putting business methods in their own types, not on entities. "Anemic" types can be a problem if you must maintain them, but when they're codegened they're hardly a maintenance problem. Making business logic separate from entity types allows your business rules and your data model to evolve independently. Yes, you must use partial classes if you must mix these concerns, but I don't believe that separating your model and your rules is a bad thing.
I think that repositories should expose IQueryable, but you can make a good case that domain services should not. People often try to build their repositories into domain services, but remember that the repository exists only to abstract away persistence. Concerns like security should be in domain services, and you can make the case that having IQueryable there gives too much power to the consumer.
I think it's OK to expose IQueryable outside of the repository, only because not doing so could be unnecessarily restrictive. If you only expose data via methods like GetPeopleByBirthday and GetPeopleByLastName, what happens when somebody goes to search for a person by last name and birthday? Do you pull in all the people with the last name "Smith" and do a linear search for the birthday you want, or do you create a new method GetPeopleByBirthdayAndLastName? What about the poor hapless fellow who has to implement a QBE form?
Back when the only way to make ad hoc queries against the domain was to generate SQL, the only way to keep yourself safe was to offer just specific methods to retrieve and change data. Now that we have LINQ, though, there's no reason to keep the handcuffs on. Anybody can submit a query and you can execute it safely without concern.
Of course, you could be concerned that a user might be able to view another's data, but that's easy to mitigate because you can restrict what data you give out. For example:
public IQueryable<Content> Content
{
get { return Content.Where(c => c.UserId == this.UserId); }
}
This will make sure that the only Content rows that the user can get are those that have his UserId.
If your concern is the load on the database, you could do things like examine query expressions for table scans (accessing tables without Where clauses or with no indexed columns in the Where clause). Granted, that's non-trivial, and I wouldn't recommend it.
It's been some time since I asked that question and had a chance to do it on my own.
I don't think it's a good practice to expose IQueryable at all outside the DAL layer. It brings more problems that it solves. I'm talking about large MVC applications. First of all the refactorings is harder, many developers user IQueryable instances from the views and after struggle with the fact that when resolving IQueryable the connection was already disposed. Performance problems because all the database is often queried for a given set of resultats and so on.
I rather expose Ienumerable from my repositories and believe me, it saves me many troubles.