I'm still trying to get a grip with WPF and MVVM and stumbled upon questions, where the easy way seems to violate the MVVM rules.
As far as I understood it, in MVVM the view model is not allowed to know about the view. So if I put views and view models in different assemblies, the view model assembly is not allowed to reference the view assembly.
So, here are my questions:
Let's say I have a MainView and a corresponding MainViewModel. The MainView has a button that is supposed to close the window and do some serious stuff before closing (for instance saving data and configurations).
This button is bound to a CloseCommand in the MainViewModel, but how do I know in the MainViewModel which view to close.
My easy (and wrong) ways would be either to give the MainViewModel an instance of the MainView on initialisation or to give the view-to-close as a command parameter.
But both solutions violate the MVVM rule.
Let's say my MainView contains a TextBox bound to a string property of my MainViewModel. If the text, the user types in the TextBox, isn't unique enough, I'd like to open a new modal window in which the user can select his input out of various choices.
To open a modal window in WPF you have to put the MainView in the Owner property of the new window. Therefore you need a reference to the MainView in the MainViewModel.
Same problem exists, if you try to show a modal message box (a message box that is tied to the parent window and can't be put behind the parent window through mouse clicks or other user actions).
So, how is one supposed to do actions in the view model when you need knowledge about the view?
Thanks for your help.
It seems that you wish to close the main window, and that is perfectly fine. As many things, this can be solved with a new level of abstraction. Lets say you have an interface called IApplication with a method Close(). And then lets say you have an implementation of the interface that might look something like:
class ApplicationWrapper : IApplication
{
public void Close()
{
Application.Current.MainWindow.Close();
}
}
Couldn't you inject the IApplication interface in the view model and call its Close method from the command?
I would propose MVVM Dialogs, but I am biased since I also am the author.
Related
I have always read that is not a good solution to use in the view model the messageBox to show a dialog when it is used the MVVM pattern.
Show I think that the other solution is create a view and a view model that is create in my main view model and related the view and the view model of the dialog. Additionally, I need to create a class that is passed from the main view model to the dialog view model that is returned as result of the dialog.
But really the second way is better? what is it the difference? because in both cases I need to wait until the result of the dialog.
Or both of t he solutions are a bad option?
Thanks.
In my opinion, creating a ViewModel for a MessageBox is overkill. I'd create an interface for ViewModels with a ShowMessage event, and an attached behavior with an attached property that can bind to the ViewModel, register a listener for the ShowMessage event, and opens a MessageBox when the event is raised. The result of the message box could be passed through the EventArgs.
The difference here would be that you can encapsulate the interface and the attached behaviour in a reusable component, and that you need minimal code in the ViewModel to use it.
I've been puzzled by this for a while. I am writing quite a large RibbonWindow WPF application using the MVVM pattern. The screen has a RibbonBar menu along the top and the rest of it displays the various Views. Some Views contain other Views and some of these have buttons that launch child Windows.
So far, I have been doing this from the View code behind file, but I'm aware that these files are supposed to be empty when using MVVM. I could move the child window launch code to the ViewModel, but then I would need a reference to the main RibbonWindow (to set as the child window owner) and that doesn't seem right.
Any advice or tips on how this is normally achieved using MVVM would be greatly appreciated.
I usually handle this by creating some sort of WindowViewLoaderService. When your program initializes you register your Window's and your ViewModels with code something like this:
WindowViewLoaderService.Register(TypeOf(MainWindowView), TypeOf(MainWindowViewModel));
WindowViewLoaderService.Register(TypeOf(MyWindowView), TypeOf(MyWindowViewModel));
Then when you can for example call into this service from your ViewModel and all you have to reference is your other ViewModel. For example if you are in your MainWindowViewModel you might have code like this:
var myChildWindowVM = new MyWindowViewModel();
WindowViewLoaderService.ShowWindow(myChildWindowVM);
The WindowViewLoaderService would then look up what View is associated with the specified ViewModel you passed it. It will create that View, Set its DataContext to the ViewModel you passed in, and then display the View.
This way your ViewModels never know about any Views.
You can roll your own one of these services pretty easily. All it needs to do is keep a Dictionary with the key being your ViewModelType and the value being your ViewType. The Register method adds to your dictionary and the ShowWindow method looks up the correct view based on the ViewModel passed in, creates the view, sets the DataContext, and then calls Show on it.
Most MVVM Frameworks provide something like this for you out of the box. For example Caliburn has a slick one that just uses naming convention its called ViewLocator in this Framework. Here is a link that summarizes: http://devlicio.us/blogs/rob_eisenberg/archive/2010/07/04/mvvm-study-segue-introducing-caliburn-micro.aspx
Cinch on the other hand calls it a WPFUIVisualizerService which you can see in action here:
http://www.codeproject.com/KB/WPF/CinchIII.aspx
These should help get you rolling.
Well, one remark to start with is that, "Having no code AT ALL in the code-behind" is actually a "myth". If you want to be pragmatic, and you see that having some code (as little as possible would be better), will make your life easier and solve your problem, then you should go with that.
However, in this situation, there are actually some loosely coupled ways to do this. You could have a service that does the interaction for you. You initiate the interaction with the user from the ViewModel, the service takes care of that (by showing a ChildWindow for example), and gives you back the user's reponse. That service can be mocked for testing easily. And it can be tested seperately.
That is, if you want to do things yourself. If you want a framework to do the heavy lifting for you, you can check out the InteractionRequest functionaity offered by Prism. Here's the MSDN article that talks about adanced MVVM scenarios which includes a section on User Interaction Patterns. That's the way I do it, and it's pretty simple, elegant and straightforward.
Hope this helps :)
To take Matt's answer one step further, you can have all your view's be a user control. Then create a ViewContainer, which is a window with your data templates (as you described).
Then you just ship the viewmodel you wish to open over to the window service, which sets the DataContext. The service would then open the window and the contentcontrol will resolve the correct view for the viewmodel.
This means all the registration is done in the XAML and the window service just knows how to do just that...open and close windows.
This is an old post, but maybe this'll help someone along the way: I use MVVM, and raise events for opening child windows from the ViewModel back to the View. The only code behind is handling the event, opening the window, setting owner of the child window and that's pretty much it. In the viewmodel, if the eventhandler is null, then it's not subscribed to by the view and doesn't fire. The VM does not know about the view. The code is pretty simple also and only takes a few lines.
In this situation View should handle the opening of the child windows.
However, ViewModel might drive the creation of the windows, but calling into View to create a new Windows.
This will save the logic of MVVM pattern: ViewModel has the "brains" but is not involved in a particular window creation.
ViewModel only is used to present system state and UI logic. One viewmodel may be referenced by multiple views. It have no knowledge of UI specific code like parent/child relationship, position, layout, size etc. So it is better to pop child window in view's code-behind with ViewModel's state changed event or command event and event arguments. In this way you can specify which one is the parent view in the UI layer.
In the MVVM (Model-View-ViewModel) pattern should the ViewModel reference the view. I would think that it should not. But how should the following scenario be handeled? I have a view that has a tab control as the main container, the viewmodel for this view implements a command to add a new tab to the tab control. The easy way would be to allow the viewmodel to reference the view and then in the command implementation to just programmatically add the new tab to the tabcontrol in the view. This just seems wrong. Should I somehow bind the tabcontrol to the viewmodel and then implement a data/control-template to add the new tabs. I hope this makes some kind of sense to somebody :)
In "pure" MVVM, the ViewModel shouldn't really reference the View. It's often convenient, however, to provide some form of interface in the View whereby the ViewModel can interact with it.
However, I've found that I almost never do that anymore. The alternative approach is to use some form of attached property or blend behavior within your View, and bind it to your ViewModel properties. This allows you to keep the View logic 100% within the View. In addition, by creating a behavior for this, you create a reusable type that can be used to handle this in every ViewModel->View interaction. I strongly prefer this approach over having any View logic within the ViewModel.
In order to demonstrate this technique, I wrote a sample for the Expression Code Gallery called WindowCloseBehavior. It demonstrates how you can use a Behavior within the View bound to properties in the ViewModel to handle controlling a Window's life-cycle, including preventing it from being closed, etc.
Reed and Dan covered the general approach but in reference to your specific case, TabControl is an ItemsControl and so can bind its ItemsSource to a data collection in your ViewModel representing the set of tabs to display. The UI for each type of tab can then be represented by a DataTemplate specific to the data type of an item (either using DataType or a DataTemplateSelector). You can then add or remove data items as needed from your VM and have the tabs update automatically without the VM knowing anything about the TabControl.
I find that it's often a helpful compromise to expose an interface on the View that handles View-specific functionality. This is a good way to handle things that are awkward to accomplish with pure binding, such as instructing the form to close, opening a file dialog (though this often gets put in its own service interface) or interacting with controls not designed well for data binding (such as the example you provided.)
Using an interface still keeps the View and ViewModel largely decoupled and enables you to mock the specific IView during testing.
One of us is missing something obvious. Your tab control is an ItemsControl. You should bind the ItemsSource of your tab control to an ovservable collection in your view model. When you handle the command in your view model to add a tab, you simply add a new element to this collection and, voila, you've added a new tab to the control.
I have an application that need to open a dialog from a button where the user enters some information.
At the moment I do it like this (which works fine)
The button click generates a command in the ViewModel.
The ViewModel raises an event which the Controller listens to.
The Controller works out the details of the new window (i.e. View, ViewModel & model) and opens it (ShowDialog)
When the window is closed the Controller adds the result to the eventargs and returns to the ViewModel
The ViewModel passes the information to the Model.
There are a lot of steps but they all make sense and there is not much typing.
The code looks like this (the window asks for the user's name)
ViewModel:
AskUserNameCommand = DelegateCommand(AskUserNameExecute);
...
public event EventHandler<AskUserEventArgs> AskUserName;
void AskUserNameExecute(object arg) {
var e = new AskUserNameEventArgs();
AskUserName(this, e);
mModel.SetUserName(e.UserName);
}
Controller:
mViewModel.AskUserName += (sender,e) => {
var view = container.Resolve<IAskUserNameView>();
var model = container.Resolve<IAskUserNameModel>();
var viewmodel = container.Resolve<IAskUserNameViewModel>(view, model);
if (dlg.ShowDialog() ?? false)
e.UserName = model.UserName;
}
My question is how the horizontal communication works in the MVVM pattern.
Somehow it seems wrong to let the controller be involved in the data transfer between the models.
I have looked at the mediator pattern to let the models communicate directly. Don't like that idea since it makes the model depending on implemetations details of the GUI. (i.e. if the dialog is replaced with a textbox, the model need to change)
I don't like most of the current suggestions for one reason or another, so I thought I would link to a nearly identical question with answers I do like:
Open File Dialog MVVM
Specifically the answer by Cameron MacFarland is exactly what I do. A service provided via an interface to provide IO and/or user interaction is the way to go here, for the following reasons:
It is testable
It abstracts away the implementation of any dialogs so that your strategy for handling these types of things can be changed without affecting constituent code
Does not rely on any communication patterns. A lot of suggestions you see out there rely on a mediator, like the Event Aggregator. These solutions rely on implementing two-way communication with partners on the other side of the mediator, which is both hard to implement and a very loose contract.
ViewModels remain autonomous. I, like you, don't feel right given communication between the controller and the ViewModel. The ViewModel should remain autonomous if for no other reason that this eases testability.
Hope this helps.
i use this approach for dialogs with mvvm.
all i have do do now is call the following from my viewmodel to work with a dialog.
var result = this.uiDialogService.ShowDialog("Dialogwindow title goes here", dialogwindowVM);
I have come across similar problems. Here is how I have solved them, and why I have done what I have done.
My solution:
My MainWindowViewModel has a property of type ModalViewModelBase called Modal.
If my code needs a certain view to be modal, it puts a reference to it in this property. The MainWindowView watches this property through the INotifyPropertyChanged mechanism. If Modal is set to some VM, the MainWindowView class will take the VM and put it in a ModalView window where the appropriate UserControl will be shown through the magic of DataTemplates, the window is shown using ShowDialog. ModalViewModelBase has a property for DialogResult and a property called IsFinished. When IsFinished is set to true by the modal VM, the view closes.
I also have some special tricks for doing interactive things like this from backgroundworker threads that want to ask the user for input.
My reasoning:
The principle of modal views is that other views are disabled, while the modal is shown. This is a part of the logic of the View that is essentially lookless. That's why I have a property for it in the MainWindowViewModel. It I were to take it further, I should make every other property or command for all other VM's in the Main VM throw exceptions, while in modal mode, but I feel this to be excessive.
The View mechanism of actually denying the user any other actions, does not have to be performed with a popup window and showdialog, it could be that you put the modal view in the existing window, but disable all others, or some other thing. This view-related logic belongs in the view itself. (That a typical designer can't code for this logic, seems a secondary concern. We all need help some times.)
So that's how I have done it. I offer it only as a suggestion, there is probably other ways of thinking about it, and I hope you get more replies too.
I've used EventAggregator from Prism v2 in similar scenarios. Good thing about prims is that, you don't have to use entire framework in your MVVM application. You can extract EventAggregator functionality and use it along with your current setup.
You might have a look at this MVVM article. It describes how a controller can communicate with the ViewModel:
http://waf.codeplex.com/wikipage?title=Model-View-ViewModel%20Pattern&ProjectName=waf
I am implementing MVP/M-V-VM in WPF and I'm having good luck with it so far. However, I don't see how this model supports implementing Modal dialog boxes. I've derived my work from Crack.NET (http://www.codeplex.com/cracknetproject) to learn how this stuff works.
I have a ShellView view (which is just XAML) that has a menu on it. The menu binds to a command in the ShellModelView that says "EditPreferences".
The ShellModelView implements the ICommand for EditPreferences and here we want to put up a dialog box to let the user edit preferences for the application.
Several problems here:
1. The ShellModelView doesn't have a reference to the ShellView to properly parent the dialog. The ShellModelView is the DataContext of the ShellView but I don't see a backreference that's setup.
2. The ShellModelView shouldn't be loading explicit UI anyway. So what's the proper interaction model here?
3. How do I build up my PreferencesDialog so that it's properly separated between logic and view as well? PreferencesDialog itself needs to be a Window so you can call ShowDialog on it, but that means you need a reference to the Window (e.g. View) in order to instantiate it. Ideally I should be able to unit test the code/validation within PreferencesDialog without instantiating the view (using a Mock view perhaps?).
Perhaps this is not the appropriate way to look at it, but this is the approach I take with M-V-VM in WPF. Opening windows and dialog boxes or an "EditPreferences" view are UI specific functions. If I were to rewrite the your entire UI replacing all of the views, I may wind up combining the "EditPreferences" view with another view, and therefore never want to open it in another screen. If this were tied to the ViewModel, it would be difficult to get around. In this particular situation, I would have a button or menu item in my "ShellView" that creates a new instance of my "EditPreferences" view, and then passes in the "EditPreferences" ViewModel which may either come from a property in my "ShellViewModel", or perhaps my "EditPreferences" view instantiates the ViewModel itself.
Here is a similar question on SO that basically says the same thing: M-V-VM Design Question. Calling View from ViewModel
You will need a controller in your case. The controller should be in charge for showing the preference dialog window.
As I can envision it the controller should be responsible for creating the ShellModelView and binding view's DataContext to it. The controller should be also responsible for handling command execution of EditPreferences. In the execution logic the controller will create a new PreferencesDialog and its corresponding view model.
You can find similar patterns in Prism if you haven't already did it. You can also reuse the DelegateCommand provided there :)
Have the PreferencesDialog implement a interface that is one of the properties of the EditPreference command. The command would interact with the dialog through the interface. For Unit Testing the mock object would implement the interface instead.
The dialog class then can reside on your highest layer.
My 2 cents is:
Pass some kind of viewfactory contract as the command parameter or inject a viewfactory contract into the view model. The view model will them use the viewfactory to create any modal/non modal views it needs. The viewfactory could also take in as a parameter of its Show/ShowModal method a viewmodel to display. Furthermore, the viewfactory could use a datatemplate to display any viewmodal passed in as a parameter.
Add a ShowViewModel property to the viewmodel in question. A DataTrigger could then watch for this property and when it is of a particular type show the view, etc.