I am fairly new to WPF and MVVM.
I see that a DataGrid can be bound to a CollectionViewSource or an ObservableCollection or a DataSet.
What is the significance of using one over the other?
CollectionViewSource is the XAML equivalent (can be instanciated in XAML) for CollectionView, which provides functionality for grouping, sorting, filtering, and navigating in any data collection. If you want to provide any of these features in the view (XAML) only and do not want to do this in the viewmodel, use a CollectionViewSource else use the ObservableCollection or CollectionView in your viewmodel. Use a DataSetwhen you have your data already in that form and do not want to go through the hassle of creating a viewmodel.
I mostly use the ObservableCollection in the viewmodel.
I would not recommend you using DataSet. You could sort, group and filter data using CollectionViewSource.
Related
I am pretty new to WPF MVVM, so pardon me if I understood MVVM concepts wrongly.
I have a DataGrid in my View, which I have bound the ItemsSource to an ObservableCollection<M> in the ViewModel. The M class is a Model class. However, the M class has bool properties, which are to be displayed in the DataGrid as "Yes/No" strings.
Currently, I am using a Converter to convert the bool value to string. But, it just feels wrong for the ViewModel to expose a list (ObservableCollection) of a Model to the View. I have also read that in MVVM, conversions should be done at ViewModel. So, what is the right way to implement this the MVVM way for a DataGrid?
In an ideal world, you would wrap your Model objects in their own ViewModel so that your ObservableCollection contains a ViewModel type with those bool Model properties converted to Yes/No string properties.
However, in a pragmatic world, if you are not editing those values, I wouldn't bother except to note that if you are exposing many of those bool properties and have many thousands of rows, you will take a performance hit on rendering the grid while the DataGrid instantiates a Converter per property and row.
Using converters is not a wrong way. As per my suggestion, you should bind the data as you're doing now and in the view you can create and use a BoolToStringConverter for converting the boolean value to yes or no.
How do I add data to the WPF ListView items like Windows Forms?
Using databinding you can bind the itemssource to something like an observable collection then have your items added to that.
This approach makes it fairly easy to manipulate the data once you get used to databinding as long as you have INotifyPropertyChanged implemented your listview will update when you call OnPropertyChanged().
I have a WPF user control ...which is in MVVM. The user control(which contains a listview) need data from the page (where it is included). I have to set a property to get this data input. Will this comply with MVVM...if not, what is the way for the same?
I'm afraid this won't be correct in MVVM design pattern. try to stick to your view model to define properties. Why don't you consider moving that property to control's vm?
Use an ObservableCollection rather.
ObservableCollection<myModel> myOC = new ObservableCollection<myModel>();
where myModel is a class that has to be constructed transforming your columns in the DataTable to Properties.
In your MainViewModel, loop through the DataReader and create myOC out of it.
Now bind myOC to a ListView in your page.
The DataTemplate of ListView should be a view(UserControl) drawing data from a ViewModel constructed out of myModel
But your UserControl has the entire ListView inside. If that is on purpose, then let me know the entire design to give a better idea.
I'm developing a WPF application using the MVVM pattern and I need to display a list of items in a ListView (with filtering), with the fields of the selected item displayed in a Master/Detail view. I'm torn between the following two ways of doing this:
Exposing a CollectionView in my ViewModel, and binding to this.
Exposing a plain IList in my ViewModel, and using CollectionViewSource to create the CollectionView in XAML.
Is there an accepted way of doing this? Any thoughts on the best way?
I do the former (expose CollectionView from the VM) but what really matters is where your filtering logic is. That should definitely be in the VM so that it can be tested, even if the view has to wire up the CollectionViewSource to the VM. That said, I don't think there's anything particularly nasty or anti-MVVM about exposing a CollectionView from your VM.
I know I'm a bit late answering your question but I just saw it today.
I have created master/detail viewmodels that use the CollectionViewSource and blogged about it.
I wrote about a viewmodel for master/detail tables here that uses :
http://reyntjes.blogspot.com/2009/04/master-detail-viewmodel_24.html
You can also find a viewmodel for the observablecollection class on my blog pages.
Maybe you find it of use to you.
I'm trying to understand the basic MVVM design approach when using ItemsControl by binding it via DataTemplates to ObservableCollections on the ViewModel.
I've seen examples that bind to ObservableCollections of strings, Views, and ViewModels.
Binding to strings seems to be only for demos, it is the binding to "ViewModels that contain collections of Views that contain collections of ViewModels" that the power of WPF seems to really come out.
For those of use proficient in the MVVM pattern, what is your standard approach to binding ItemsControl, ListView, ListBox to collections in a ViewModel? I'm looking for advice from experience like this:
always use ObservableCollection<...> and never List<...> because...
something better than ItemsControl to display a collection is...
in order to get filtering to work in your ViewModel instead of code-behind, use...
use collections of Views when ... and collections of ViewModels when...
90% of the time I create an ItemsControl and bind it to an ObservableCollection of Views which have their own ViewModels...
I would use an ObservableCollection of ViewModels for the following reasons:
ObservableCollection already has events available for signaling when it has been modified (e.g. when items are added/removed from the collection).
We're at the ViewModel 'layer' so it provides cleaner separation to have a ViewModel contain a collection of ViewModels rather than Views
If it is necessary to modify or get data from items within the collection you can more easily modify/access that data if the items are ViewModels (if they're views you'll frequently be casting the View's DataContext or accessing its UI elements).
I like using an ObservableCollection of ViewModels. The view that binds to the collection can define a DataTemplate that gives the ViewModel its look. This leads to less coupling among the components.
I have the same question, but replace the "view" with "model". :)
I have a MODEL with a collection of other models.
I want my viewmodel to have an observable collection of other viewmodels, but once I instantiate it like that - the connection between the model collection content is lost.
Do I now need to start wiring all the events from the viewmodels observable collection back to the models collection?