In my WPF application, I made my own control and want to bind to a property in it. This is what I tried so far:
public partial class BreadcrumbContainer : Grid
{
public static readonly DependencyProperty TestProperty =
DependencyProperty.Register(nameof(Test), typeof(string), typeof(BreadcrumbContainer), new PropertyMetadata(string.Empty));
public string Test
{
get { return (string)GetValue(TestProperty); }
set { SetValue(TestProperty, value); Refresh(); }
}
public BreadcrumbContainer()
{
InitializeComponent();
}
private void Refresh()
{
// never gets called
}
}
And I try to bind to my Test property like this:
<controls:BreadcrumbContainer Grid.Row="0" Grid.Column="0" Grid.ColumnSpan="3" Test="{Binding SearchMessage}"/>
And in my view model, I have a property SearchMessage. All my other bindings are working, so it must be something I'm doing wrong in my BreadcrumbContainer
Quoting from Adam Nathan's WPF Unleashed
.NET property wrappers are bypassed at runtime when setting
dependency properties in XAML. Although the XAML compiler depends on
the property wrapper at compile time, WPF calls the underlying
GetValue and SetValue methods directly at runtime!
The property wrapper in your case is your Test property. So basically, don't put any logic in there since it never gets called in runtime. The proper way to do this is to use a property changed callback. One example for you is in the answer found here. Notice the callback initialization in the DependencyProperty.Register call.
There is also the "official" documentation in Checklist for Defining a Dependency Property
- Implementing the "Wrapper":
In all but exceptional circumstances, your wrapper implementations should perform only the GetValue and SetValue actions, respectively. The reason for this is discussed in the topic XAML Loading and Dependency Properties.
From XAML Loading and Dependency Properties:
Because the current WPF implementation of the XAML processor behavior for property setting bypasses the wrappers entirely, you should not put any additional logic into the set definitions of the wrapper for your custom dependency property. If you put such logic in the set definition, then the logic will not be executed when the property is set in XAML rather than in code.
This is one example of a baffling behavior in WPF that will drive you mad if you don't know. It's not really your fault but I suggest reading WPF Unleashed by Adam Nathan - and all the online documentation - to learn more about these types of pitfalls.
Related
I got a binding source not being updated when the targeted DependencyProperty of a custom UserControl changes.
The source is a ViewModel loaded with MEF into the DataContext of my custom UserControl.
My binding looks like this in the root XAML of MyUserControl
// MyUserControl.xaml
<MyUserControlBase x:Class="MyUserControl" MyDependencyProperty="{Binding ViewModelProperty}">
If i use the MyDependencyProperty with a FrameworkPropertyMetadata and use the callback function when the property changes i can do the following which works fine
// MyUserControlBase.cs
private static void MyDependencyProperty_Changed(DependencyObject depObj, DependencyPropertyChangedEventArgs args)
{
var filter = (UserControl )depObj;
var vm = (ViewModel)filter.DataContext;
vm.ViewModelProperty= (VMPropType)args.NewValue;
}
Registration of the DependencyProperty in MyUserControlBase which inherit UserControl.
// MyUserControlBase.cs
public static readonly DependencyProperty MyDependencyPropertyProperty = DependencyProperty.Register("MyDependencyProperty",
typeof(VMPropType),
typeof(MyUserControlBase),
new FrameworkPropertyMetadata(null, MyDependencyProperty_Changed));
But why can't i get the simple two way binding to work when done in the XAML?
Output window show no binding failurs. I can see the ViewModel.ViewModelProperty getter is being called. Just not the setter once MyDependencyProperty changes.
It don't appear to be a problem with the ordering of events. The ViewModel is created long before DependencyProperty is changed for the first time.
I've also looked at Setting up binding to a custom DependencyProperty inside a WPF user control
But his problem seems slightly different since i actualy inherit from my own Base class which holds the DependencyProperty.
Thank you for any help.
Edit: with link to example solution.
Solution zip here
Sorry for the scary looking link, I don't know alot of quick fileshareing sites. If its bad post comment and I will remove it asap, but it seems ok.
Answer updated / irrelevant info deleted
After looking at the code in your sample I saw what the problem is. You have this "selector" control. In the BindDependencies method you set a binding on the MyControlBase.MyDependencyProperty. But at the same time you also bind this property to your control's datacontext (in MyUserControl.xaml). Effectively this means that in the BindDependencies method you are overwriting the binding to your viewmodel thus it is not active after that method - you can see this yourself by breaking into before and after the SetBinding call and calling BindingOperations.GetBindingExpression(control, MyUserControlBase.MyPropertyDependencyProperty) - the bindings are different. This is why your code does not work. I guess you will have to find another way of transferring the value there :)
Some additional info
In WPF a property can be a target of only one binding. This is actually very logical - if a property is bound to two sources - which one should it use? The fact that the binding is marked as OneWayToSource does not really matter in this situation as it still counts as a binding that targets the control's property.
One way you can investigate and see if it works for you is the MultiBinding - it does allow to bind the control's property to several sources by implementing your own IMultiValueConverter. You can find more info on this on MSDN in the link provided.
Do you expose the ViewModelProperty as a regular property..
Usually you do the following....
public static readonly DependencyProperty ViewModelPropertyProperty = DependencyProperty.Register("ViewModelProperty",
typeof(VMPropType),
typeof(MyUserControlBase),
new FrameworkPropertyMetadata(null, ViewModelProperty_Changed));
public VMPropType ViewModelProperty {
get { return (VMPropType)GetValue(ViewModelPropertyProperty); }
set { SetValue(ViewModelPropertyProperty,value); }
}
EDIT -- After comment.
When are you checking that the property has changed? By default WPF bindings only update the values when they lose focus, you change change the UpdateSourceTrigger property of the binding to alter this behaviour.
I'm writting a form in WPF/c# with the MVVM pattern and trying to share data with a user control. (Well, the User Controls View Model)
I either need to:
Create a View model in the parents and bind it to the User Control
Bind certain classes with the View Model in the Xaml
Be told that User Controls arn't the way to go with MVVM and be pushed in the correct direction. (I've seen data templates but they didn't seem ideal)
The usercontrol is only being used to make large forms more manageable so I'm not sure if this is the way to go with MVVM, it's just how I would of done it in the past.
I would like to pass a class the VM contruct in the Xaml.
<TabItem Header="Applicants">
<Views:ApplicantTabView>
<UserControl.DataContext>
<ViewModels:ApplicantTabViewModel Client="{Binding Client} />
</UserControl.DataContext>
</Views:ApplicantTabView>
</TabItem>
public ClientComp Client
{
get { return (ClientComp)GetValue(ClientProperty); }
set { SetValue(ClientProperty, value); }
}
public static readonly DependencyProperty ClientProperty = DependencyProperty.Register("Client", typeof(ClientComp),
typeof(ApplicantTabViewModel),
new FrameworkPropertyMetadata
(null));
But I can't seem to get a dependancy property to accept non static content.
This has been an issue for me for a while but assumed I'd find out but have failed so here I am here.
Thanks in advance,
Oli
Oli - it is OK (actually - recommended) to split portions of the View into UserControl, if UI became too big - and independently you can split the view models to sub view models, if VM became too big.
It appears though that you are doing double-instantiations of your sub VM. There is also no need to create Dependency Property in your VM (actually, I think it is wrong).
In your outer VM, just have the ClientComp a regular property. If you don't intend to change it - the setter doesn't even have to fire a property changed event, although it is recommended.
public class OuterVm
{
public ClientComp Client { get; private set; }
// instantiate ClientComp in constructor:
public OuterVm( ) {
Client = new ClientComp( );
}
}
Then, in the XAML, put the ApplicantTabView, and bind its data context:
...
<TabItem Header="Applicants">
<Views:ApplicantTabView DataContext="{Binding Client}" />
</TabItem>
I answered a similar question as yours recently: passing a gridview selected item value to a different ViewModel of different Usercontrol
Essentially setting up a dependency property which allows data from your parent view to persist to your child user control. Abstracting your view into specific user controls and hooking them using dependency properties along with the MVVM pattern is actually quite powerful and recommended for Silverlight/WPF development, especially when unit testing comes into play. Let me know if you'd like any more clarification, hope this helps.
I've built a custom control in WPF that inherits from ListBox. In this I have implementet my own property that is a BindingList. To make this property bindable I've implemeneted it as a DependencyProperty:
public BindingList<CheckableListItem> CheckedItems
{
get
{
return (BindingList<CheckableListItem>)GetValue(MultiComboBox.CheckedItemsProperty);
}
set
{
SetValue(MultiComboBox.CheckedItemsProperty, value);
}
}
public static readonly DependencyProperty CheckedItemsProperty;
I register this DependencyProperty in a static constructor inside my custom control:
CheckedItemsProperty = DependencyProperty.Register("CheckedItems",
typeof(BindingList<CheckableListItem>),
typeof(MultiComboBox),
new FrameworkPropertyMetadata(new BindingList<CheckableListItem>()));
(MultiComboBox is the name of my custom control. CheckableListItem is a simple class I've written just for this purpose).
This BindingList is then updated inside the custom control (never outside) as the user interacts with it.
When I use my custom control in XAML I bind to the CheckItems property with the mode "OneWayToSource". I'm using the MVVM pattern and the property in the ViewModel that I'm binding to is also a BindingList. The ViewModel never affects this list, it just reacts at the changes that the custom control make to the list. The property in the ViewModel looks like this:
private BindingList<CheckableListItem> _selectedItems;
public BindingList<CheckableListItem> SelectedItems
{
get
{
return _selectedItems;
}
set
{
if (value != _selectedItems)
{
if (_selectedItems != null)
{
_selectedItems.ListChanged -= SelectedItemsChanged;
}
_selectedItems = value;
if (_selectedItems != null)
{
_selectedItems.ListChanged += SelectedItemsChanged;
}
OnPropertyChanged("SelectedItems");
}
}
}
As you can see I'm listening to changes made to the list (these changes always occur inside my custom control), and in the "SelectedItemsChanged"-method I update my Model accordingly.
Now...this works great when I have one of these controls in my View. However, if I put two (or more) of them in the same View strange things start to happen. This will of course mean that I'll have two lists with selected items in my ViewModel. But if do something in the View that changes one of the lists, both lists are affected! That is, the event handlers for the event ListChanged is triggered for both list if changes are made to any one of them!
Does anyone recognize this problem and/or have a solution to it? What is wrong with my implementation?
My first though is that the DependencyProperty is static. Normally that means shared between all instances. But I guess DependencyProperties work in some other "magical" way so that might not be the problem.
Any tips or hints is appreciated!
I had a similar problem with a collection-type dependency property. My solution was taken from the MSDN article on Collection-Type Dependency Properties. It was adding the following line
SetValue(OperatorsPropertyKey, new List<ListBoxItem>()); //replace key and type
in the constructor of my control because it seems that a collection-type dependency property constructor is being called only once no matter how many instances your control containing this collection has (static eh).
This sounds like you bound both/all the Views to the same ViewModel. That would explain that changes to one cause changes in the other.
I've got a button strip usercontrol that I want to have on most of my forms.
I've added the commands as follows ...
public ICommand Create
{
get
{
return buttonCreate.Command;
}
set
{
buttonCreate.Command = value;
}
}
I've set these as dependency properties so I can bind to them ...
public static readonly DependencyProperty CreateCommandProperty =
DependencyProperty.Register(
"Create",
typeof(ICommand),
typeof(StandardButtonStrip),
new PropertyMetadata((ICommand)null));
I'm then binding my usercontrol to a command ...
<commoncontrols:StandardButtonStrip HorizontalAlignment="Stretch" Create="{Binding CreateCommand}" />
I'm setting up the command as follows ...
_viewModel.CreateCommand = new DelegateCommand<object>(OnCreateCommand, CanCreate);
but despite the fact that i'm always returning true on my CanCreate method the button is disabled ... if I put a break point on return true it never fires!
public bool CanCreate(object parm)
{
return true;
}
I've tried this to see if it will refresh the binding, but no joy!
_viewModel.CreateCommand.RaiseCanExecuteChanged();
I think the problem is down to the user control and how I'm passing the Command up as a property, but not sure ...
The way this looks, you have a dependency property on a view model. If you are really using MVVM, that is definetly not the way to go about it (not because of religious adherence to a pattern, but because it's not the optimal way).
First of all, is your view model a DependencyObject?
If it is, you should downgrade it to a class which implements INotifyPropertyChanged. Why? Because the Button's Command property is a DependencyProperty itself (inherited from ButtonBase) and supports databinding already.
If it isn't, then a dependency property on it will not work, which is fine, because you shouldn't have dependency properties on your view model in the first place.
What you should do, is have the view model as the DataContext for your control (I'm guessing you already have that set up). Then change your view model's CreateCommand to a plain ICommand, and bind the createButton's Command property like this (in your default StandardButtonStrip style)
<Button Name="createButton" HorizontalAlignment="Stretch" Command="{Binding CreateCommand}" />
This way, it will still be reusable, you just need to ensure that any view model you associate with your user control has a property CreateCommand of type ICommand (and that view model will be inherited down to the button control by default - one of the nicest things the wpf guys thought up).
So to recap, you should do it the other way around, more or less.
Hope this was helpful, cheers.
One caveat to the accepted answer -
Using a delegate command I could only get this to work if I created a new
Command<T> : DelegateCommand<T> and hooked up the Command Manager.
event EventHandler ICommand.CanExecuteChanged
{
add { CommandManager.RequerySuggested += value; }
remove { CommandManager.RequerySuggested -= value; }
}
Have you overridden any of the user control's functionality?
One common problem is overriding a method without calling the base's implementation. For example, if you've overridden OnContentChanged() without calling base.OnContentChanged(), you may have accidentally supressed the firing of the ContentChanged event.
I am new to WPF and trying to wrap my head around WPF's framework, what it does and does not do for you.
To clarify this, I would like to know what is the difference between this:
public List<MyCustomObject> MyCustomObjects
{
get { return (List<MyCustomObject>)GetValue(MyCustomObjectsProperty); }
set { SetValue(MyCustomObjectsProperty, value); }
}
public static readonly DependencyProperty MyCustomObjectsProperty =
DependencyProperty.Register("MyCustomObjects", typeof(List<MyCustomObject>),
typeof(Main), new UIPropertyMetadata(new List<MyCustomObject>()));
and this:
public ObservableCollection<MyCustomObject> MyCustomObjects { get; set; }
public Main ()
{
MyCustomObjects = new ObservableCollection<<MyCustomObject>();
}
Ok, we must put some order into things, there's a few concepts mixed in together here.
First of all, you're asking what the difference is between a field-backed property and a dependency property. Google would be your best friend, however I recommend this blog post by WPF's vanguard Josh Smith: Overview of dependency properties in WPF
In short: dependency properties support the richness that is WPF: Styling, animation, binding, metadata, and more.
Secondly, you're asking what the difference is between a List and an ObservableCollection. Well the latter provides change notifications (in the forms of events) on any change to the collection (addition, removal, change of order, clearing, etc.), and the former does not. You can read more about that here: The ObservableCollection Class
In short: ObservableCollection provides change notifications which are required for the UI to automatically reflect changes in the view model.
In addition to Aviad and Reed's answers, I would like to point out a serious bug in your first code sample :
public static readonly DependencyProperty MyCustomObjectsProperty =
DependencyProperty.Register("MyCustomObjects", typeof(List<MyCustomObject>),
typeof(Main), new UIPropertyMetadata(new List<MyCustomObject>()));
The new List<MyCustomObject>() used as the default value will be created only once, so by default all instances of your type will share the same List<MyCustomObject> instance, which is probably not what you want... The only sensible default value here is null
In the first case, you're setting up a Dependency Property containing a List<T> instance.
In the second, you're making a normal CLR property, but having it setup as an ObservableCollection<T>.
For WPF Data Binding, there are some differences here.
Typically, you want all of your properties in the DataContext (which is the object that, by default, things "bind" to) to either implement INotifyPropertyChanged or to be a Dependency Property. This lets the binding framework know when changes are made to that object. Normally, though, you'd only use a Dependency Property if your working with a custom control - it's usually a better idea to have your object to which your data bound be a separate class, assigned to the DataContext. (For details here, see Josh Smith on MVVM or my recent detailed post on MVVM...)
However, with a collection, you typically also want the binding system to know when the items within the collection change (ie: an item is added). ObservableCollection<T> handles this by implementing INotifyCollectionChanged.
By using the second approach (using an ObservableCollection<T>), your UI can tell when items were added or removed from the collection - not just when a new collection is assigned. This lets things work automatically, like a ListBox adding elements when a new item is added to your collection.
1:
You're using a dependency property to "tell" the framework when that property is changed. This will have the following consequences for your binding:
MyCustomObjects.Add(new MyCustomObject()); //Wont update the view through databinding
MyCustomObjects = new List<MyCustomObject>(); //Will update the view through databinding
You could gain the same databinding functionality by implementing INotifyPropertyChanged on which ever class exposes the property, but dependency properties a capable of much more than just notifying about changes. These are rather advanced features though, which you aren't likely to come across in your average joe app :)
2:
You're using an observable collection, which implements INotifyCollectionChanged for you, to tell the databinding whenever the content of the collection has changed. This will have the opposite consequences than #1:
MyCustomObjects.Add(new MyCustomObject()); //Will update the view through databinding
MyCustomObjects = new ObservableCollection<MyCustomObject>(); //Won't update the view through databinding