I have asked this question on MSDN forums as well ...
http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en/wpf/thread/4493988a-9bd8-48fe-aff0-348502136a80
I need to know that why Microsoft suggests that BindingList is not properly supported in WPF...
What is it that doesnt work with BindingList in WPF? I find it pretty useful as it is. So far I personally have not found BindingList any slower or a having more load on memory.
Plus WPF ItemsControls, ItemsTemplates, Styles, Hierarchies work great with BindingLists too. They are equally observable.
Being a hardcore WPF developer myself and an ObservableCollection fan, my faith is getting shaken by a been-there-done-that BindingList....
Why should I use ObservableCollection over BindingList?
(keeping aside INotifyPropertyChanged which both have to implement for item property changes)
This may be of interest:
http://www.themissingdocs.net/wordpress/?p=465
most important paragraphs:
But the implementation does not scale, it is slow, it performs terribly with larger lists. If your element type supports INotifyPropertyChanged, every time one of those elements raises the property changed event the entire list is walked to work out the index in the list of the item which raised the event! I was in shock when I first realised this. You see BindingList is truly just a rather thin wrapper over Collection, so there is no metadata associated with each entry, all of the binding of the element PropertyChanged event is directed to a single handler, and all it gets given is the source and the name of the changed property, so there is no way to include the NewIndex parameter in ListChangedEventArgs without doing a search. (By default this search even uses the default object comparator, so if you happen to have two different but sometimes equal objects in your list, enjoy the results…)
Another side note – AddNew, the other feature which BindingList has which Collection does not – also does not scale. It has to use IndexOf to find out where in the list the newly added item ended up in case it needs to cancel the add, because it supports auto sorting in derived types. (BindingList does not support auto sorting itself…)
Related
I have lots of entities with nested List<> in each.
For example, I have BaseEntity which has List<ColumnEntity>.
ColumnEntity class has List<Info> and so on.
We are working with a WPF UI, and we need to track all changes in every List of BaseEntity. It is implemented by instantiating a new ObservableCollection based on the needed list, and with binding to that ObservableCollection.
What are the pros and cons changing all these nested Lists to ObservableCollections? So we can track all changes in BaseEntity itself without reassigning each list of BaseEntity to modified bound ObservableCollection?
Assuming that methods specific to List are never used.
Interesting question, considering that both List and ObservableCollection implement IList<T> there isn't much of a difference there, ObservableCollection also implements INotifyCollectionChanged interface, which allows WPF to bind to it.
One of the main differences is that ObservableCollection does not have AddRange method, which might have some implications.
Also, I would not use ObservableCollection for places where I know I would not be binding to, for this reason, it is important to go over your design and make sure that you are taking the correct approach in separating layers of concern.
As far as the differences between Collection<T> and List<T> you can have a look here
Generic Lists vs Collection
It depends on exactly what you mean by this:
we need to track all changes in every List of BaseEntity
Would it be enough to track changes to objects already in the list? Or do you need to know when objects are removed from/are added to/change positions within the list?
If a list will contain the same items for their whole lifetime, but the individual objects within that list will change, then it's enough for just the objects to raise change notifications (typically through INotifyPropertyChanged) and List<T> is sufficient. But if the list will contain different objects from time to time, or if the order changes, then you should use ObservableCollection<T>.
So while the differences may be interesting (and a previous poster has already covered those), typically you won't have that much of a choice - either you need ObservableCollection<T> or you don't.
List represents a strongly typed list of objects that can be accessed by index. It provides methods to search, sort, and manipulate lists. The List class is the generic equivalent of the ArrayList class. It implements the IList generic interface using an array whose size is dynamically increased as required.
ObservableCollection is a generic dynamic data collection that uses an interface "INotifyCollectionChanged" to provide notifications when items get added, removed, or when the whole collection is refreshed.
Read more about it in this link: http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/42536/List-vs-ObservableCollection-vs-INotifyPropertyCha
One more important difference is you can access ObservableCollection only from thread on which it was created where as list can be accessed fromany thread.
I see no problem with that, other than a very marginal performance overhead.
Note that if you modify the internal Lists directly, you are not notified about changes. Also if the objects which are contained in the ObservableCollection are modified you are not notified. Notification occurs only, if elements are added, replaced, removed or moved.
I have lots of entities with nested List<> in each.
For example, I have BaseEntity which has List<ColumnEntity>.
ColumnEntity class has List<Info> and so on.
We are working with a WPF UI, and we need to track all changes in every List of BaseEntity. It is implemented by instantiating a new ObservableCollection based on the needed list, and with binding to that ObservableCollection.
What are the pros and cons changing all these nested Lists to ObservableCollections? So we can track all changes in BaseEntity itself without reassigning each list of BaseEntity to modified bound ObservableCollection?
Assuming that methods specific to List are never used.
Interesting question, considering that both List and ObservableCollection implement IList<T> there isn't much of a difference there, ObservableCollection also implements INotifyCollectionChanged interface, which allows WPF to bind to it.
One of the main differences is that ObservableCollection does not have AddRange method, which might have some implications.
Also, I would not use ObservableCollection for places where I know I would not be binding to, for this reason, it is important to go over your design and make sure that you are taking the correct approach in separating layers of concern.
As far as the differences between Collection<T> and List<T> you can have a look here
Generic Lists vs Collection
It depends on exactly what you mean by this:
we need to track all changes in every List of BaseEntity
Would it be enough to track changes to objects already in the list? Or do you need to know when objects are removed from/are added to/change positions within the list?
If a list will contain the same items for their whole lifetime, but the individual objects within that list will change, then it's enough for just the objects to raise change notifications (typically through INotifyPropertyChanged) and List<T> is sufficient. But if the list will contain different objects from time to time, or if the order changes, then you should use ObservableCollection<T>.
So while the differences may be interesting (and a previous poster has already covered those), typically you won't have that much of a choice - either you need ObservableCollection<T> or you don't.
List represents a strongly typed list of objects that can be accessed by index. It provides methods to search, sort, and manipulate lists. The List class is the generic equivalent of the ArrayList class. It implements the IList generic interface using an array whose size is dynamically increased as required.
ObservableCollection is a generic dynamic data collection that uses an interface "INotifyCollectionChanged" to provide notifications when items get added, removed, or when the whole collection is refreshed.
Read more about it in this link: http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/42536/List-vs-ObservableCollection-vs-INotifyPropertyCha
One more important difference is you can access ObservableCollection only from thread on which it was created where as list can be accessed fromany thread.
I see no problem with that, other than a very marginal performance overhead.
Note that if you modify the internal Lists directly, you are not notified about changes. Also if the objects which are contained in the ObservableCollection are modified you are not notified. Notification occurs only, if elements are added, replaced, removed or moved.
We're rolling our own special Items-based control/panel combo that isn't based on a subclass of ItemsControl (there are multiple reasons why we can't do this which I won't get into here) but our control does handle thousands and thousands of data items, so we'd like to implement Visual virtualization.
What we're wondering is if it makes more sense to try and bang the existing ItemContainerGenerator class into our design or roll our own virtualization method.
On the one hand, ItemContainerGenerator already handles virtualization and is very efficient, and tried-and-true code is almost always preferable to starting from scratch, but on the other, the ICG was designed specificially for use with, and relies on features of the ItemsControl, which again, this control is not. Plus, that is a container generator but in our case, we just need to generate and lay out a specific, known visual that represents the data item.
Now, perhaps I'm over-simplifying things, but all I see is a need to determine which items would be visible in the ViewPort, ensure visual representations of those items are created, measured and arranged, then discard any left-over already-created visuals. To keep track of it all, it seems a simple item-to-visual mapping scheme is all that is needed, perhaps with a ItemVisual attached property on the DataItem's ViewModel object. That way when an item is removed/destroyed, we just check if there's an existing visual, and if so, nuke it.
That said, can anyone think of a reason we shouldn't simply roll our own visual virtualization? Again, the ICG does this, but I'm wondering if that's taking a Semi to the store to get eggs.
The setup of the solution is a little bit complicated and restricts my options.
There is a project that contains all the GUI components; in it resides a control that contains a list of 'Project' items that each contains a list of 'Document' items. Initially both of these lists were implemented as ObservableCollections.
Project and Document are defined in a separate project, one that does not have access to System.Windows
One of the critical functions of the program generates a Document within a background thread (because it is slow and time-consuming); this Document needs to be added to a Project's Documents collection.
Since the document is being generated in a background thread, that thread cannot add the document to the collection - a NotSupportedException is generated.
There are several ways to extend ObservableCollections to be thread-safe - unfortunately all of the ones that I have seen so far rely on System.Windows.Threading.Dispatcher, which I cannot use due to (2).
I have discovered that I cannot use INotifyPropertyChanged on a list and must use a collection implementing INotifyCollectionChanged - basically ObservableCollection again. I'm not sure if it's a good idea to implement an extension of a List object when there are so many different methods that modify it, and what's to say it wouldn't have the same issues as ObservableCollection?
Using an explicit UpdateSourceTrigger on the binding does not look feasible, given that the Document is in a HierarchicalDataTemplate, and in any case passing the binding to the Project object looks to be a bit ugly.
Any suggestions?
Create the document on the background thread but use a callback on the primary thread to add it to the ObservableCollection (assuming the ObservableCollection is created on the primary thread).
Advance apologies for the event-style explanation; there's a lot of factors that I feel all play a role of their own. WPF is not my native framework of choice, and it probably shows. :)
Old situation: I had a window with several controls. Depending on their selections, I used multibindings and a converter to determine whether certain controls needed to be shown that inform the user about the implications of their changes before they'd eventually confirm them by OK (or simply dismissed by using Cancel). This worked perfectly.
Problem: Too many controls as time went by, too much clutter.
Solution: Put stuff in different Pages so it becomes easier to browse for the user. In order to have changes-to-be persist as a user arbitrarily browses between the pages, I create these dynamically and put them in a cache (Dictionary<string, BasePage>, see below), from which they will be pulled as the user chooses them.
Consequence: I need to decouple the bindings to the notification controls as the different options are now on different pages.
Solution? I put a BasePage class in that exposes certain abstract read-only properties that define the various aspects that the window needs to know about in order to do its notifications. For example, a bool requiresReboot property defines whether the current state of things on that page requires a reboot to take (full) effect. A specific page implements the property based on its controls.
Problem: I do not know how to keep create a proper binding that properly gets updated as the pages are changed. I tried giving my notification controls a binding to the Dictionary<string, BasePage> with a converter that checks all pages and the relevant property.
Questions:
1) How do I create a proper property for this purpose? I presume I need a DependancyProperty as I did a fair bit of reading on MSDN, but I can't figure out how this fits together.
2) How do I make a link between my custom property so that it allows (multiple) control(s) on a page to change that property? Do I use INotifyPropertyChanged somehow? My old example bound against several CheckBox.IsChecked properties in XAML. I am trying to avoid putting tons of events (OnChange, etc) on the controls as the original code did not need it and I have been told it makes for a messy solution for as far WPF is concerned.
3) Finally, I suspect I may need to change my Dictionary<string, BasePage> class to a custom implementation that implements some sort of INotifyPropertyChanged but for Collections? Observable Collection is the term I am looking for, I believe.
I hope someone is able to bridge the gap in my understanding of WPF (property) internals; I would very much appreciate it. A basic sample would be even better, but if it is too complicated, just a nudge in the right direction will do. Thank you. :)
It's been a while since I solved this, and while I cannot remember the exact cause of the problems, there were a few different issues that made up the bulk of the trouble I ran into.
I ended up making the Property in question a non-abstract DependencyProperty in the base class; it was the only way in which I could properly delegate the change notifications to the interface. Derived classes simply ended up binding it to their controls (with a proper Converter in the case extra logic was necessitated).
As Dictionary<string, BasePage> does not support any sort of change notification, I made an extra collection of ObservableCollection<BasePage> which I used for binding purposes.
However, such a collection does not propagate a change event when items inside of it has a property changed. Since this situation required that, and I was binding to the collection itself in the context of a property that does not have a Master<->Detail relationship like a DataGrid (which basically add their own OnPropertyChanged handlers to the binded object), I ended up subclassing a VeryObservableCollecton<>. This one listens to its own items, and throws a proper change event (I think it was an OnPropertyChanged from the INotifyPropertyChanged interface) so that the binding (or in this case a multi-binding) would refresh properly and allow my interface to update.
It is hardly the prettiest code, and it feels over-engineered, but at least it allows me to properly bind the UI to the data in this manner.