I am building a rather large WP7 application and having a lot of fun with it. It is Pivot based and has quite a lot of pivot pages. I dynamically add and remove pivot pages based on what "mode" of the application the user has selected to keep the application look and feel as simple as possible. All is going quite well so far my app is fast responsive, not a memory or resource hog and performs background loading on demand when needed.
The Model layer contains all my business logic that represents what the application is all about. It is clean and separate from the the view-model and view layers.
The View-Model layer is an abstraction of the model to the extent that it needs to interact with the view and also contains the session-ness and workflow aspects of the application in general. It contains objects which represent the Model in a way the View needs to interact with. The view model persists the state of the application in isolated storage and supports tomb-stoning.
The View layer contains a lot of elements pivots, user controls, styles, resources etc in both xaml and the corresponding code behind. I do like Blend and the Xaml designer within visual studio 2010 however I find myself still coding/configuring the view objects within the code behind due to the nature in which they interact with each other. The code behind of the view objects is becoming quite large but still only reflects the state of the view and not the state of the application. I have made use of user controls quite a lot as this lets me build reusable components across many pivot pages however the user controls are not Blend friendly. What I am worried about is that my view might becoming more complex than it needs to be and losing the ability to coordinate the user interface design with tools like expression blend.
By customising the view this way and making use of reusable controls I have reduced my Xaml considerably and don't suffer from bloated Xaml files that other developers have mentioned but lost ability to co-ordinate with Blend. Is there are happy medium to be found? Should I be looking at designing custom controls?
[Edit]
Thanks for your reply. I think it boils down to either a lot of Xaml with a designer or break it down into user controls with more code behind. Since I moved into user controls my mindset has moved back to doing things by hand rather than with a designer (better the devil you know right!). My thoughts are should I make my user controls into skin-able custom controls or just keep going how I am and avoid using the designer. Its a bit of potato-potardo but I don't want to get into bad habits.
Custom Controls (or Templated Controls) are not directly related to your question as far as I can see. Custom controls are just controls that add new properties, events and methods to an existing control and are still capable of being 'templated' by a designer.
Creating UI in code does make it harder to design the application using Blend (and even the VS designer) because the only way to see the interface is by running the application.
A lot of the logic that creates the UI could possibly be replaced by using the Visual State Manager. Use states of the controls to design them for specific modes of the view. Only when you need extra/new states you will have to create a Custom Control.
As your question is a bit wide, feel free to add comments or extend your question so I can add more details or remove this answer when it is utter nonsense :)
Related
I'd like to create a Silverlight app using WCF Ria Services and the MVVM design pattern.
The main page of the app will consist of a "shell" and a large number (10s or 100s) of objects of different look (shape/size/properties) linked to each other (forming a sort of graph).
These items need to be mouse-draggable and their current position/state needs to be saved to the back-end database.
I feel that the best way to achieve this would be to have a small ViewModel and View for each item displayed, put all the important properties into the ViewModel and then somehow display all these Views in the main "shell".
However, I don't know how exactly this could be achieved. I considered using MVVM Light, but didn't find any example that would show something similar.
Can anybody point me to some examples or ideas about how this could be done?
"When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail" :)
MVVM is not designed to manage graphic intensive situation like the one you describe. It is a glue for stitching together high-level concepts in a flexible manner. With MVVM you are adding overheads that will impact performance (e.g. binding uses reflection behind the scenes). The more objects involved, the greater the impact.
The best starting point I can suggest is to imagine what you need from a 3rd party control (e.g. a custom control/container) and, if one does not actually exist already, build it as if it were a third party custom control.
You will find in practice that custom controls are seldom based on MVVM, for performance reasons if not just because "they often don't need it". They may well expose MVVM compatible properties for the external interface, but not for the low-level internals.
MVVM is a relatively high-level technique. Do not feel you have to implement it on everything.
Following MVVM do the next:
Model - create model object which will be responsible for fetching and persistence coordinates of the shapes on the screen;
View Model - one view model which will initiate fetching and persistance model objects;
View - in your case, it's a place where you do most of your work. Create custom control based on ItemsControl with Canvas panel. Custom control should pass collection of the model objects in ItemsSource, allow to drag and drop containers and call the view model command when user drops container in some place
Have a look at the Telerik controls, specifically radTileView, this seems to have the functionality that your looking for. They also have a persistance framework that should allow you to save the position of the tiles back to you database.
I have a service that returns an observable collection of persons that will be used to display the person name in a list box in my Silverlight application.
While designing the list box, the designer used sample data. However, when the xaml reaches the developer working on the view model and the service that returns an observable collection of persons to be displayed, there are some changes that need to be done.. like remove all bindings to the sample data, plug in the observable collection persons properties.
So my questions are:-
Is there a way to do this in a way where in design mode it shows the sample data and when it runs it shows the service data?
Is there a way for it to return service data while in design mode itself?
Does the designer using Expression Blend need to know what properties of the observable collection {persons} will be bound to the list box?
I would want to do this in an MVVM friendly manner {without using MVVM Light toolkit}.
Thanks for your time...
Loads of good examples out there:
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/avip/archive/2010/12/06/the-simplest-way-to-do-design-time-viewmodels-with-mvvm-and-blend.aspx
http://karlshifflett.wordpress.com/2009/10/28/ddesigninstance-ddesigndata-in-visual-studio-2010-beta2/
It's very simple. Lots of other resources on google if you need them
Edit based on comment
2. Is there a way for it to return service data while in design mode itself?
Possibly but I've not seen it. In my mind you probably wouldn't want to do this for many reasons.
You may get a delay before your data
shows up which could get quite
frustrating if you need to make a lot
of small changes.
You have a reliance on services being
available which is going to make you
even more unproductive if they ever
go down.
You or a designer doesn't have any
control over changing what is
displayed on an ad-hoc basis. At
least using the sample data system
you can change values to test
different scenarios without having to
get services data changed.
3. Does the designer using Expression Blend need to know what properties of the observable collection {persons} will be bound to the list box?
The designer/developer workflow is a tricky one. Obviously each project will be different, but having just finished a design heavy wpf project I can tell you that our designers want as little to do with Blend as possible.
The workflow that has worked for us, is for the developers (we have a front end team that work at the view/viewmodel level and backend team that build up the model and service layer) to build up the views as best they can. That means building the layout, composing the controls, adding most of the design and hooking up the bindings. We then had a designer who had experience in using Blend (there aren't many) delve in and tweak the designs to get them exactly as they wanted.
This way they had very little to do with the main brunt of the work and we could keep clean and organised views (something few designers would have the experience to do). The designers didn't really have to know anything about domain objects. It all worked very well once we'd worked out how it was going to work. Having the designers build up the views themselves would have been a nightmare in my opinion... and not something they'd have enjoyed either.
I have wandered into a WPF application project and have made some good progress, but one thing I am finding is that the code-behind page is now getting longer and longer... since there is only one XAML page to the whole application, the code-behind page that really just takes care of the event handlers and programmatically created controls for the design page, is now over 2000 lines. The VS2010 IDE helps in navigating all the methods, etc, but I am wondering if I am missing something as far as organizing all my controls and code-behind. Is there a way to break out some of the UI of the application into multiple XAML pages, so the code-behind will be more compartmentalized to a specific set of controls. Any search I do on multiple XAML file applications in WPF immediately leads me to XBAPS and I am interested in staying with the desktop WPF. Aside from creating regions in the one code-behind, are there any other strategies I can use to organize this code (in separate XAML files)?
Thanks!
At a minimum, separate out parts of your UI into separate UserControls, instead of including it in a single "view" in a single Window.
That being said, separating our your logic and using a pattern like MVVM will make this much cleaner in the long run. It sounds like you're using lots of event handlers - I wrote a blog series designed to help migrate from this style of development to a more MVVM style. It might be worth glancing at for ideas. It describes how WPF allows you to move away from having lots of event handlers by keeping your application logic separated from your UI code.
We were building out the next version of an in-house thick-client application using WPF/Prism (Composite Application Library). As we were nearly done with the client our team was put under new management and shortly thereafter:
We were then directed to drop the Prism framework to keep things simple. This includes not using any type of Inversion of Control.
We were directed to build out the WPF application without using MVVM or similar; and more along the lines of a traditional WinForm application. The idea is that if a developer sees a control in Visual Studio’s designer view, then (s)he should be able to click on the control and see exactly what it's doing without having to traverse through a view-model (or similar).
We have now been tasked with building out the WPF application using one primary Window, use a Frame Control to contain the content, and use a Ribbon outside of the frame for the menu items. Reason we were provided to use Frame Control:
a. We will show a view in the Frame with a Page (not a user control) and then load the page in the Frame.
b. When a new view is to be shown in the Frame, the current view (Page) will be closed/disposed and the new view (Page) will take its place in the Frame.
c. When a developer looks at the Page in design view, (s)he will be able to click on any control and see exactly what is being done.
Given the restrictions of 1 and 2 above, we’d like to present another method of building out the application that:
Can be presented as an alternative to using the “Frame Methodology” (item 3 above) but still provides the same type of functionality.
Does not use MVVM (see #1 and #2 above).
Provided the direction we’ve been given, any suggestions as to an alternative we can present? I’d request that the responses be kept on the professional level and thank you in advance.
I'd personally try to argue to use Martin Fowler's Presentation Model. (That's a joke, btw...)
Basically, you're being given a restriction that says "Use WPF, but don't use any of the features that make WPF usable." It really sounds like your requirements are such that you would be much better off explaining, reasonably, the advantages of patterns like MVVM.
It sounds like the weird requirements are really boiling down to this:
The idea is that if a developer sees a control in Visual Studio’s designer view, then (s)he should be able to click on the control and see exactly what it's doing
If that's the main issue, and the reason you're avoiding MVVM and other similar patterns, I would seriously take the time to educate the management. Looking at a Command, by name, instead of an event, by name (which is what you see in the designer) is really no more difficult.
However, in a large scale application, the separation of concerns is key. Even a properly designed Windows Forms application requires a clean separation of concerns - but with event based programming, this becomes much more difficult, especially from the designer. If you try to develop a large scale, clean, application using an event approach, you'll have event handlers, but those event handlers will all eventually need to delegate their work to a separate component.
This is actually adding an extra level of effort, from an understandability and maintenance point of view, on top of what you get with MVVM. With MVVM, you only look to the ViewModel, which is very discoverable.
BTW - The "rationale" for using a Page instead of a UserControl doesn't make any sense. You can do exactly the same thing you're describing with UserControls... The only reason to use a Frame and Page is if you want to take advantage of navigation, in which case, you can't dispose the old pages directly (or they get regenerated constantly). Also, the navigation tools probably wouldn't be used with a ribbon - the two conceptual models are quite different.
There are criticisms of MVVM which may be applicable to your project; however having unreasonable dictates of programming methodology is always a recipe for disaster.
One of the reasons that we have frameworks and spending time building layers and separation is to avoid the coding mess that always results when you can "simply click on the button in visual studio to see the code that is being executed".
There may not be a way of achieving what you've been asked to do without something similar to MVVM, because anything that has an architecture may well be labelled as being too similar.
However I have been using a system for many years that provides simple inter-object plumbing currently called Emesary you may want to read my C# .NET Emesary walkthrough.
But basically it allows my buttons to be implemented thus:
private void addButton_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
GlobalTransmitter.NotifyAll(new Notification(NotificationType.CreateRecipe));
}
This may be an answer to your problem. It's under hyped, small and so simple but it just works well.
I've achieved a solution to the second question by using a Window, a user control for the ribbon bar (the user control contains the listview), and another user control for the Frame part. This second user control obvious is built using other user controls using a very simple view class. All views and controls are connected using Emesary.
As a school project I had to develop a WPF client which allowed for multiple people to make use of it at the same time. And I used Pages. My verdict: Save yourself a huge amount of effort, and use UserControls instead.
Sometimes the Page Navigator (which you'll use to scroll through) tends to bug out and cause you a lot of problems. Maybe it was my crappy coding, but who knows?
Though I must say, the control being called "Pages" is somewhat misleading... I went "Eureka!" when I found them, and swore at them thereafter.
I totally agree with #2 (MS bigs take note!). It would be cool if you could double-click a Control and it would take you straight to its command (or event if its command is lacking). However till then, make sure that you organize your Views and ViewModels in separate folders.
Having a dual screen (or a very wide one) will allow you to have two instances of VS open on the project, one focused around the View and the other around the ViewModel (my personal choice was having Expression Blend on the View).
Although not a very big application, I managed to convert my project to proper MVVM (ie. ViewModel for every UI element, RelayCommands and Mediator) in a matter of days, so once you understand it it's not too complicated to implement. Plus, there are tools out there (such as Josh Smith's RelayCommand and Marlon Grech's Mediator - totally free, by the way) which make MVVM half as difficult, and twice as powerful.
Using WPF without MVVM is like trying to eat rice without a fork. You'd be better off using WinForms if you're not going to take advantage of what WPF has to offer. My 2 cents.
I wish I could say your management is totally wrong.. but I cannot say that as it will not be the most accurate truth. I guess that the main reason to the changes you described is either because the new manager is not comfortable with the concept of MVVM being the new messiah of UI development or/and another reason could be the cost of educated sophisticated developers vs. cheap developers which can be instructed to get the things done as fast as possible, a concept which is widely known as lean development.
So, putting all I wrote so far under "not what you asked for", here is what I suggest:
you can still use object oriented pure approach, meaning you can have a model object which already have method to show UI information. so every object will be a window derived object, that way you will loose on SOC but you still going to be OOP/OOD.
But LOL, The next phase will bring you to seperation of model from view in order to not repeat the same code in many derrived windows which relay on the same data... so your management will endorse MVC/MVP as good solution .. and the distance from it to MVVM is kinda of short if they want WPF.
Conclusion: you will have to teach your manager why it is better to go for MVVM, unless the project is very short.
I am very new to WPF, about 4 hours new. I am coming from ASP.net and Masterpages.
I was looking at examples of Control Template that can used to template a window so all windows look the same.
Other post
Can some direct me to an example of how it is accomplished or sample code from start to finish?
Second part:
Is the ControlTemplate the best way to go about building WPF windows client applications? What is best practices in architecting WPF windows applications.
Thanks
There really isn't a "best" way to architect WPF UIs. It all depends on the user experience your application will have.
If you want a very web-like experience you are probably better of using the pages constructs. Otherwise if you have windows, but want a common header, you may just want to make a control template for that. Maybe you need separate windows or maybe you just need to have a sub part of a grid panel change content depending on state... There are different ways to do things that are more or less suited to the type of client experience you want.
Although there are some best practices in relation to using MVC/MVVM design patterns, there isn't a "best" way to style and theme your controls. I don't consider WPF as friendly to newcomers as WinForms were, but at the same time it seems a lot more powerful in the long run. What might help you out are some basic levels of theming:
Styles: these are mainly aesthetic changes to the look and feel of basic controls and elements with some very basic support for triggering things like mouse cursor roll over. They are similar to CSS on webpages.
Control Templates: these are the more heavyweight versions of styles where you actually reconstitute a control so that, say a button can have a textbox inside of it. Where styles work on a logical level where something like a button is the most atomic element, control templates can drill down further into controls so that the border, background, text, etc of a button are seen as separate elements instead of one atomic part.
Data Templates: A more focused version of control templates meant to customize how data items in lists are drawn. If you have a bunch of pictures you don't want the file name to show up in the listbox, you'd rather have the image itself. A data template lets you accomplish this kind of thing.
So you have to ask yourself when you say, "Make all windows look the same," do you mean changes are merely aesthetic/looks (styles), customizing how a collection of items are displayed (data/item templates) or altogether changing how a standard control looks and behaves or making sure the layout of controls on a page are the same across multiple windows/pages (control templates)?
Finally, the "end to end" of the other post you linked to is pretty simple. You take the control template there, and under your tag you simply add Template={StaticResource MyTemplateName} and the template is applied. This article on MSDN is a decent intro to control templating.