For illustrative purposes, say I wanted to create a subclass of the WPF TextBox called BizarroTextBox where the IsReadOnly property has the reverse effect of its default behavior.
Now normally in the non-WPF world, for a hypothetical 'TextBox' control, it would be relatively trivial...
public class BizarroTextBox : TextBox
{
public override bool IsReadOnly
{
get{ return !base.IsReadOnly; }
set{ base.IsReadOnly = !value; }
}
}
...but I'm not sure how to/if it's even possible to do something similar when dealing with DependencyObjects and DependencyProperties.
While I could re-define the property's metadata in my subclass and use a Coalesce function to invert the value on the way in, I don't know of a way to invert it on the way back out.
You also can't simply use an bool-inverting converter either as there's only one object which can't be both the source and target unless you're connecting two different properties, which we're not.
You can't do it in the CLR getter/setters either as they are convenience methods which are bypassed when using bindings.
It would be so much easier if they had a coalesce-on-the-way-back-out method but I'm not aware of any such thing. So can this be done?
Related
Scenario: I have a range of custom UIElements (in fact, I have replaced all the standard WPF FrameworkElements I would use with lighter, more efficient counterparts) for a custom layout system intended to only use those. They all inherit from a class called Surface (which in turn is a direct descendant of UIElement).
I am now wondering if my version of Panel (let's call it SurfacePanel) can simply implement IList<Surface> and allow child Surface elements to be added directly to it, rather than to a Children property (as with regular WPF panels), in XAML.
To illustrate - in codebehind, I can do now this:
SurfacePanel.Add(child);
And from that, I would like to be able to do this in XAML:
<SurfacePanel>
<child />
</SurfacePanel>
But XAML seems to require me to have a codebehind pattern like this:
SurfacePanel.Children.Add(child)
(I don't really need these controls to support XAML to work in the runtime environment, but when testing and prototyping, I like to make my UI controls "XAML friendly" so I can benefit from the visual designer in VS (along with the property pane etc), if nothing more than as a 'preview' window).
Since my controls inherit from UIElement (and have the proper Measure/Arrange/Render overrides and so on), they function quite well when put on, say, a regular Canvasor Grid. But the VS XAML parser is not too happy about my SurfacePanel (that implements IList<Surface>) when I am adding children to it in markup. It says "Cannot add content to an object of type "SurfacePanel"".
I know that if I add a Children property of an appropriate type and add an attribute to the SurfaceCanvas class ([ContentProperty("Children")]), it will work. But since the SurfacePanel is itself a collection capable of the same thing, is there a way to make XAML 'get it'?
Edit:
I can solve the XAML 'compliance' by adding a Children property on the SurfacePanel that simply returns its inner List, but then adding and removal of elements on that directly bypasses the internal logic that wire the child elements up.
If the inner list was an ObservableCollection, I could do it the conventional way and do the wiring in a CollectionChanged event handler - but basically the whole point of integrating IList in the Panel directly is to avoid that..
Edit 2:
This "works" (but bypasses the wiring):
[ContentProperty("Children")]
public class SurfacePanel : Surface, IList<Surface>
{
private readonly List<Surface> _children = new List<Surface>();
public List<Surface> Children
{
get { return _children; }
}
}
I cannot return this because SurfacePanel is not a List<Surface>, but an IList<Surface>.
If I change the property to
public IList<Surface> Children
{
get { return this; }
}
I get an error message even with the following XAML (but not with <m:SurfacePanel/>):
<m:SurfacePanel>
</m:SurfacePanel>
The error message is
Cannot set content property 'Children' on element 'SurfacePanel'. 'Children' has incorrect access level or its assembly does not allow access.
Also implement IList and declare the Children property like this:
[ContentProperty("Children")]
public class SurfacePanel : Surface, IList, IList<Surface>
{
public IList Children
{
get { return this; }
}
...
}
I have a DataTemplate that needs to set the IsSelected property on an ItemsControl's container (such as TreeViewItem, ListViewItem or ComboBoxItem). However, it doesn't know the type of the container until it's passed in to it. Since IsSelected isn't part of a common base class or interface, nor is it a common dependency property registered with AddOwner to the various classes (Duh, MS!!! WTF not?!!), I ended up with this mess...
if (container is TreeViewItem) {
(container as TreeViewItem).IsSelected = true;
return;
}
if (container is ListBoxItem) {
(container as ListBoxItem).IsSelected = true;
return;
}
if (container is ComboBoxItem) {
(container as ComboBoxItem).IsSelected = true;
return;
}
...which not only is verbose, but requires me to modify it if I ever use a different ItemsControl that uses different container types! Not good!
Sure I could enhance it a little by putting this logic in extension methods (damn C# for not having extension properties!!) called IsContainerSelected and SetContainerSelected and putting them on UIElement, then moving the above code inside there, but it's just making the outside neater. The inside is still a mess.
My only other thought is to use reflection and look for an IsSelected property and use that if found, but I'm always leery of doing things like that. However, since there isn't a common interface or base class, I'm not really sure I have a choice here.
For context, I'm sharing a complex data template between several different ItemsControls and the template itself has controls that can receive focus such as checkbox and textbox. However, when those controls receive focus via the mouse, the underlying container item doesn't get selected and whatever was selected before remains so.
My workaround is to use an attached behavior that utilizes the preview events to intercept the focus before it happens and set the underlying item accordingly, which works great when I've hard-coded TreeViewItem or ListBoxItem, etc., but I don't want to hard-code the type since the control shouldn't really care. So that's the part that breaks down.
Ugh!!! Why didn't MS just register the same attached property or at least create an ISelectableContainer interface?!!
I have read your answer, and it does make sense - in your case, IsSelected may obviously be part of the ViewModel, and that seems to be the best solution in your case.
But you asked for further explanation about C# dynamic features. C# 4.0 now has some dynamic functionalities, which allow us to create code that would only be possible in languages like Python, Ruby or JavaScript. This, of course, has its cost - a dynamic abuse would not only make code slower, but also more confusing - because you would lose compile-time errors and IntelliSense.
I have written a simple example so you may understand it better:
public class ClassOne
{
public int SameProperty { get; set; }
}
public class ClassTwo
{
public int SameProperty { get; set; }
}
public class ClassThree
{
public string SameProperty { get; set; }
}
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
public Form1() {
InitializeComponent();
}
private void Form1_Load(object sender, EventArgs e) {
dynamic wrapper = new ClassOne();
wrapper.SameProperty = 5;
wrapper = new ClassTwo();
wrapper.SameProperty = 15;
wrapper = new ClassThree();
wrapper.SameProperty = "Now it is a string!";
// And now a run-time error...
wrapper.AnotherProperty = "And this won't work...";
}
}
As you can see, wrapper has no definite type whatsoever - a dynamic reference will allow any kind of method or property invocation, since the actual binding will only be made during run-time, not compile-time.
Of course, this example is very naive, but sometimes dynamic code may be useful - it is a good option to avoid explicit reflection, or to avoid long if...else statements based on type (like your snippet above).
I'm not sure that I fully understand your problem, but you could try adding an IsSelected boolean to your model and then binding that property against the Item control it's contained in. That way, you just have to worry about setting that property in the model, regardless of the container.
Per #mdm20's answer, he suggested modifying the ViewModel, which is of course normally what you want to do. However this is a purely view-related issue (keyboard navigation-related) and isn't reflected in the ViewModel at all, nor in this case should it be.
But that gave me an idea! Since I'm using a custom control to render the item in whichever items control (via its data template) it's being added to, that control naturally does have multiple instances (all of which are pointing to the same ViewModel instance), which is what I want!
Therefore, rather than adding the IsSelected to the ViewModel, I added it to the user control itself, then I just bind to that within the data template for the respective ItemsControl which I do know about. I can then set the IsSelected property in the code-behind for the user control as needed (i.e. during the preview mouse events, etc.) and the underlying ItemsControl responds appropriately! Works great and keeps the ViewModel clean since neither the model, nor the viewmodel need to know about it. The IsSelected remains purely in the UI which is where in this particular case it should be!
Do folks have any guidance on when a simple .NET property that fires INotifyPropertyChanged.PropertyChanged is sufficient in a view model? Then when do you want to move up to a full blown dependency property? Or are the DPs intended primarily for views?
There are a few approaches:
1. The dependency property
While you using the dependency property it makes the most sense in elements-classes that have a visual appearance (UIElements).
Pros:
WPF do the logic stuff for you
Some mechanism like animation use only dependency property
'Fits' ViewModel style
Cons:
You need to derive form DependencyObject
A bit awkward for simple stuff
Sample:
public static class StoryBoardHelper
{
public static DependencyObject GetTarget(Timeline timeline)
{
if (timeline == null)
throw new ArgumentNullException("timeline");
return timeline.GetValue(TargetProperty) as DependencyObject;
}
public static void SetTarget(Timeline timeline, DependencyObject value)
{
if (timeline == null)
throw new ArgumentNullException("timeline");
timeline.SetValue(TargetProperty, value);
}
public static readonly DependencyProperty TargetProperty =
DependencyProperty.RegisterAttached(
"Target",
typeof(DependencyObject),
typeof(Timeline),
new PropertyMetadata(null, OnTargetPropertyChanged));
private static void OnTargetPropertyChanged(DependencyObject d, DependencyPropertyChangedEventArgs e)
{
Storyboard.SetTarget(d as Timeline, e.NewValue as DependencyObject);
}
}
2. The System.ComponentModel.INotifyPropertyChanged
Usually, when creating a data object, you’ll use this approach. It is simple and neat solution for Data-like stuff.
Pros and Cons - complementary to 1. You need to to implement only one event (PropertyChanged).
Sample:
public class Student : INotifyPropertyChanged
{
public event PropertyChangedEventHandler PropertyChanged;
public void OnPropertyChanged(PropertyChangedEventArgs e)
{
if (PropertyChanged != null)
PropertyChanged(this, e);
}
}
private string name;
public string Name;
{
get { return name; }
set {
name = value;
OnPropertyChanged(new PropertyChangedEventArgs("Name"));
}
}
3.PropertyNameChanged
Rising an event for each property with specified name(f.e. NameChanged). Event must have this name and it is up to you to handle/rise them. Similar approach as 2.
4. Get the binding
Using the FrameworkElement.GetBindingExpression() you can get the BindingExpression object
and call BindingExpression.UpdateTarget() to refresh.
First and second are the most likely depending what is your goal.
All in all, it is Visual vs Data.
As far as I know, DependencyProperty is only required when you need
PropertyValue inheritence
you need to allow the property to be set in Style setters
Use animation for the property
etc.
These features will not be available with normal properties.
DependencyProperty is required if you want to allow a binding to be set on the property. Usually this is for custom UIElements you create. You want to allow people to be able to bind data to your UIElements.
<local:MyUIElement MyProperty={Binding Path=SomethingToBindTo} />
To do this requires that MyProperty is a dependancy property
The main problem I see with INotifyPropertyChanged is if you viewmodel is complex containing many nested types it appears that you have to bubble the PropertyChanged event up through the hierarchy.
As the other answers have already said enough about when to create dependency property. i.e.
PropertyValue inheritence
you need to use binding on a property
Use animation for the property
The one more perspective/question on this is "In a WPF application is makes sense to create dependency properties in a control cause they are likely to change during user interaction like Height,width, text,content, background etc but what about other classes like Behaviors Classes(Non UI classes). Do properties in those classes need to be a dependency property?"
I won't say for very absolute or emphasis on some set of rules here but you should create your properties as DP. As from design perspective if a property is DP it's always in default form of WPF to use/bind.i.e.
As a DP is much more fast/natural in reflecting changes compare to a normal CLR property.
A DP has validation mechanism to validate the value assigned and a default structure to revert the value.
A DP has Coerce value callback to control the limits of property.
A DP has meta data associated with it unlike CLR property.
In terms of practices I've seen people doing many mistakes in nested bindings and then raising changes these kind of faults doesn't happen with a DP cause of it's design and compatibility of raising change itself. So with a little extra syntax you put a flexibility/performance/ easeness to your application. So go for it wherever affordable.
Still can't say sure for ViewModel classes/other helper classes. will update the answer if found convincing reasons in future.
Just a post worth reading on this topic
I have a complex WPF control that for some reasons (ie. performance) is not using dependency properties but simple C# properties (at least at the top level these are exposed as properties).
The goal is to make it possible to bind to some of those top level properties -> I guess I should declare them as DPs.(right? or is there some other way to achieve this? )
I started reading on MSDN about DependencyProperties and DependencyObjects and found an example:
public class MyStateControl : ButtonBase
{
public MyStateControl() : base() { }
public Boolean State
{
get { return (Boolean)this.GetValue(StateProperty); }
set { this.SetValue(StateProperty, value); }
}
public static readonly DependencyProperty StateProperty = DependencyProperty.Register(
"State", typeof(Boolean), typeof(MyStateControl),new PropertyMetadata(false));
}
If I'm right - this code enforces the property to be backed up by DependencyProperty which restricts it to be a simple property with a store(from functional point of view, not technically) instead of being able to calculate the property value each time getter is called and setting other properties/fields each time setter is called.
What can I do about that? Is there any way I could make those two worlds meet at some point?
//edit
I guess I have to tell you a little more about what I want to do and what my limitations are. So:
I have TabControl that is bound to a collection of ViewModel(I'm using MVVM pattern) objects. Every tab is meant to be an editor for one object of that collection. Objects can be of different types so I have multiple definitions each with a different DataType property. Now I have that complex WPF Control that I want to use as a part of one of those DataTemplates. If I use usual TextBox I can simply bind to its Text property, but I can't do the same with Text property of that custom control simply because its Text property is not a dependency property.
In this scenario I have :
no direct access to the control itself nor to its events
no code behind file that I can use to do that kind of thing
I can see however a dirty solution -
In the Window class I would have to subscribe to CollectionChanged event of the collection that is bound to the TabControl.
Whenever an item is added to that collection use ItemContainerGenerator to obtain a copy of I suppose TabItem and use it to find the right copy of 'complex control'
Regiter items handlers to 'complex controls' events to do the job
This is wrong because:
this is agains MVVM - I have to play with tab control to do the job instead of doing it in the ViewModel class
this couples in an unwanted way the view and viewmodel
I think you are mixing up Dependency Properties and implementing INotifyPropertyChanged on your classes.
You don't need your property to be a dependency property, you just need your class to implement INotifyPropertyChanged and call OnPropertyChanged whenever the state of your object changes in a way that would affect the value you want to expose to binding.
So let's say you have a property Sum that you want to bind to. The Sum property simple adds two other properties (or fields, or whatever) together. When anything happens that affects the Sum calculation, you want to notify that the Sum value has changed, so the any controls bound to Sum get updated.
public int Sum => Value1 + Value2;
public int Value1
{
set
{
// changing this affects "Sum", so I need to notify that the binding should update
_value1 = value;
OnPropertyChanged("Sum");
}
}
public int Value2
{
set
{
// changing this affects "Sum", so I need to notify that the binding should update
_value2 = value;
OnPropertyChanged("Sum");
}
}
It seems to me that you've been saddled with a WPF user control that was built by someone who didn't intend it to be used with data binding. I would assume that this is for one of two reasons: a) there's some logical reason that you shouldn't be able to bind to this property, or b) the original author of this control didn't know what he was doing. You haven't provided enough information for me to know which of those two conditions is the one you're really working under.
But in general, the reason you can't expose calculated properties for binding is that calculated properties generally don't have a setter. It doesn't make sense to set a property whose value is calculated.
If there are other properties whose values need to be updated when this one changes, the right approach (or at least the one consonant with the design of dependency properties) is to handle those updates in the dependency property's callback function, which is kind of what the callback function is for.
Is there a way to know the first time a Dependency Property is accessed through XAML binding so I can actually "render" the value of the property when needed?
I have an object (class derived from Control) that has several PointCollection Dependency Properties that may contain 100's or 1000's of points. Each property may arrange the points differently for use in different types shapes (Polyline, Polygon, etc - its more complicated then this, but you get the idea). Via a Template different XAML objects use TemplateBinding to access these properties. Since my object uses a Template I never know what XAML shapes may be in use for my object - so I never know what Properties they may or may not bind to. I'd like to only fill-in these PointCollections when they are actually needed.
Normally in .NET I'd but some logic in the Property's getter, but these are bypassed by XAML data binding.
I need a WPF AND Silverlight compatible solution.
I'd love a solution that avoids any additional complexities for the users of my object.
Update
One way that I've found to do this is using Value Converters. In my situation I had multiple point collections. There was a main dep. property that contained the usual shape of the data. Two alternate shapes were needed for reuse in other areas/contexts.
At first I had 3 dep. props. But, I could have just had one property (the usual shape) and used a value converted to transform the points into my other 2 desired shapes. Doing this I only make the one set of points in the control. The expense of transforming points to the secondary shapes is only incurred when used. Now my main control doesn't need to anticipate how data needs to look for every possible template thrown at the control - now its the template designers problem.
Update 2
Certainly INotifyPropertyChanged and regular properties are the recommended way to handle this.
You don't necessarily have to use dependency properties to enable data-binding. However, you then have to implement INotifyPropertyChanged if changes at the source should be propagated to the target of the binding. A "normal" .NET property is easy to lazy load perhaps like this:
PointCollection points
public PointCollection Points {
get {
return this.points ?? (this.points = CreatePoints());
}
}
PointCollection CreatePoints() {
// ...
}
I'm not sure how you can fit INotifyPropertyChanged into your control, but it sounds a bit strange that your control supplies data to other parts of the system. Perhaps you need to create a view-model containing the data that you then can let your control data-bind to.
If I paraphrase your question to
How do I get notified when dependency property is changed?
will this be correct? I draw this from your phrase "Normally in .NET I'd but some logic in the Property's getter, but these are bypassed by XAML data binding".
If I'm correct, then you can register your own property changed callback. It's always called. Doesn't matter who caused the change binding, style or trigger. The following code snippet is taken from MSDN Article "Dependency Property Callbacks and Validation":
public static readonly DependencyProperty CurrentReadingProperty =
DependencyProperty.Register(
"CurrentReading",
typeof(double),
typeof(Gauge),
new FrameworkPropertyMetadata(
Double.NaN,
FrameworkPropertyMetadataOptions.AffectsMeasure,
new PropertyChangedCallback(OnCurrentReadingChanged),
new CoerceValueCallback(CoerceCurrentReading)
),
new ValidateValueCallback(IsValidReading)
);
public double CurrentReading
{
get { return (double)GetValue(CurrentReadingProperty); }
set { SetValue(CurrentReadingProperty, value); }
}
Your takeaway here is OnCurrentReadingChanged() method. Hope this helps :).