I have a Silverlight client and a WCF service that I want to have share a class:
[DataContract]
public class DatesAreFun
{
[DataMember]
private readonly DateTime _date;
[DataMember]
private readonly bool _isFun;
public DateTime DateTime { get { return _date; } }
public bool IsFun { get { return _isFun; } }
public DatesAreFun(DateTime date, bool isFun)
{
_date = date;
_isFun = fun;
}
}
The WCF side seems to send the appropriate data across the wire just fine, but the Silverlight side doesn't like it one bit. It is treating the WCF service DatesAreFun class as a different class than my DatesAreFun class.
Any suggestions on how best to remedy this? Thanks!
This is a common issue and has been covered here more than a few times.
When you add your service reference, make sure you click the Advanced button, then ensure you have ticked the Reuse types in referenced assemblies checkbox, and selected the Reuse types in all referenced assemblies option.
You also have to create a new class library assembly that targets the Silverlight runtime. This is because the class library referenced by the WCF services will target the full (or maybe the client profile) version of the .Net framework, which a Silverlight assembly cannot do (in fact a Silverlight assembly can only reference other Silverlight targeted assemblies). In your new class library you can reference the same physical files that the full version of the class library is using, this is detailed more here (i had the same question once upon a time...). You could also pick your way through this bunch of search results for related questions.
Depending on how you do things you may find you also have to trawl through the Reference.cs file of the Service Reference, and change the namespaces of the named data entities. (This file will get regenerated if you update or reconfigure the service reference).
Related
Say this is my classes
#Entity
public class Library{
...
}
#Entity
public class Book{
#Load
#Parent
#ApiResourceProperty(ignored = AnnotationBoolean.TRUE)
private Ref<Library> libraryRef;
#Ignore
private Library library;
}
I want to send List<Book> to the "android" client: I don't want the android client to get libraryRef but I want the client to get library
Here is the data access method I have now
public static List< Book > getAllBooks(){
return OfyService.ofy().load().type(Book.class).list();
}
My endpoint will just return List<Book> to android. I believe I have accomplished the first part: make sure datastore does not store library but libraryRef. But how do I accomplish the second part: make sure the client gets library?
I am sure it is not yet loaded. How do I make sure it is loaded? Do I have to use my own for-loop for iteration?
My advice for anyone working with code shared between client and server is to make a clean separation between your API objects and your domain objects. It's a little more work up front to make DTOs but it makes your whole system more flexible - if you want to change your domain objects, you don't risk breaking a zillion mobile phone apps that are on a slow (or nonexistant) upgrade cycle.
I found that the proxy generated with SlSvcUtil.exe (or by adding reference to Web References) only supports Event based async model which is absolutely inappropriate from design point of view (events were 2nd class citizens from the first days).
I'm going to implement F#'s async builder approach and I found "old style" Begin/End are much easier to be generalized. I notices SlSvcUtil.exe generates Begin/End methods pair but marks them both with private keyword?
A couple options on top of my head are:
expose Begin/End methods by updating the proxy class by hand
use wsdl.exe and create wrapper library for missing System.Web classes
use other communication protocols (HttpClient, Tcp)
use third-party proxies (failed to find any so far)
Any ideas?
Say someone created a remote service with one method:
public interface CompressService
{
public byte[] Compress(byte[] inData);
}
After SlSvcUtil I got:
public class CompressServiceSoapClient: ClientBase<CompressServiceSoap...
{
private BeginOperationDelegate onBeginCompressDelegate;
private EndOperationDelegate onEndCompressDelegate;
public event System.EventHandler<CompressCompletedEventArgs> CompressCompleted;
public void CompressAsync(byte[] inData, object userState);
}
While in fact I need:
public class CompressServiceSoapClient: ClientBase<CompressServiceSoap...
{
public IAsyncResult BeginCompress(byte[] inData, System.AsyncCallback callback, object asyncState);
public byte[] EndCompress(IAsyncResult result);
}
Answer
The solution is to declare contract interface with async methods and do not use generated code inherited from ClientBase<>. The article http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd744834(v=vs.95).aspx describes this in more details.
You can access the begin/end methods by using the channel factory for the end point.
Basically just create a new ChannelFactory and pass in a binding and end point. You can use the host source to dynamically update the end point so it's not hard-coded. The resulting instance will expose the begin/end methods for you.
You cannot vote on your own post
0
Hi.
I am developing this (http://arg-co.com/SabteNam%20-%20Copy.zip) windows application, and for my DAL I use Entity Framework. But every single extension has its own EntityTypeConfiguration, so I decided to use [Import] and [Export] to add them in OnModelCreating method of my DbContext.The problem here is that, in 'SabteNamDbContext' class which is located on 'SabteNamDataAccess' library, the '_Configs' is not initialized so I cant iterate it and add its items to 'modelBuilder.Configurations'.
In the source code of 'SampleConfiguration' class, I commented out '[Export(typeof(IDbConfiguration))]' but even Uncommenting this part of code, do not cause application to work properly.
Intresting point is that, if I use the following code in 'Main' windows form, the '_Configs' would be initialized :
[ImportMany(typeof(IDbConfiguration))]
public IEnumerable<EntityTypeConfiguration<object>> _Configs { get; set; }
How can this be fixed ?
While I realize this is probably no longer of use to you, we use a variation on this model from OdeToCode, which I advise you read.
In our case, we have created an interface for our extensions in general, not just for the entity configuration like Scott did, which allows us not only to load the configurations, but also factory and test data per extension, add new permission types to the core application, etc.
Our OnModelCreating looks something like this:
protected override void OnModelCreating(DbModelBuilder modelBuilder)
{
// load core object mappings
modelBuilder.Configurations.Add(new UserConfiguration());
modelBuilder.Configurations.Add(new PermissionConfiguration());
// get plugin assemblies
var catalog = new DirectoryCatalog("bin");
var container = new CompositionContainer(catalog);
container.ComposeParts();
var plugins = container.GetExportedValues<IPlugin>();
// load plugin object mappings
foreach (IPlugin plugin in plugins)
{
plugin.RegisterDomainEntities(modelBuilder.Configurations);
}
base.OnModelCreating(modelBuilder);
}
I've created a ComVisible-class:
[Guid("73a3f91f-baa9-46ab-94b8-e526c22054a4"), ComVisible(true)]
public interface ITest
{
void Foo();
}
[Guid("99f72d92-b302-4fde-89bb-2dac899f5a48"), ComVisible(true)]
public class Class1 : ITest
{
public void Foo() { }
}
and registered it via
regasm ComClassTest.dll /tlb:ComClassTest.tlb
into the registry.
When I try to call it in my Silverlight 4 out-of-browser, elevated trust application like this:
var foo = AutomationFactory.CreateObject("ComClassTest.Class1");
I get an exception "{System.Exception: Failed to create an object instance for the specified ProgID."
However, I am able to call AutomationFactory.CreateObject("Word.Application") without an Exception and to call Activator.CreateInstance(Type.GetTypeFromProgID("ComClassTest.Class1")) in a normal C#-console application if I copy the ComClassTest.dll into the bin-directory.
What have I forgotton?
First thing to do is test that you can create the object from somewhere else such as VBScript. Create a .vbs file with the content:-
o = CreateObject("ComClassTest.Class1")
If that doesn't generate an error then there is something specifically that SL OOB is upset with otherwise your problem isn't really related to Silverlight at all.
Consider making the following changes to your COM code.
Its often easier to specify ComVisible(true) at the assembly level. You can do that from the application tab of the project properties on the Assembly Information dialog. You can also get Visual Studio to register the assembly with COM and build time using the option found on the build tab of the project properties.
Its a good idea to be specific about the ComInterfaceType you want to expose.
Things get really messy if you expose the class interface directly generally you only want the interface you have defined to be used and that this be the default interface for the class. In addition it probably better to stick to COM naming conventions for the default interface of a class.
Finally (and possibly crucially in your case) its a good idea to be explicit about the ProgId to use for the class.
Applying the above and we get:-
[InterfaceType(ComInterfaceType.InterfaceIsDual)]
[Guid("73a3f91f-baa9-46ab-94b8-e526c22054a4")]
public interface _Class1
{
void Foo();
}
[ClassInterface(ClassInterfaceType.None)]
[Guid("99f72d92-b302-4fde-89bb-2dac899f5a48")]
[ProgId("ComClassTest.Class1")]
public class Class1 : _Class1
{
public void Foo() { }
}
I have reasonably limited data to move between silverlight and a WCF service. So I have set up some datacontracts. I was hoping to be able to use the same classes to use for some limited data validation on the client side, without needing the overhead of DTOs and stuff.
I have a contract something like this:
[DataContract]
class MyObject
{
private String _id;
[DataMember]
public String ID
{
get
{
return _id;
}
set
{
_id = value;
DoStuff();
}
}
Now when I deserialize the object the setter will be run. This will set the private variable _id which is good. But I don't want the DoStuff() to be run on deserialization.
I had hoped to use the [OnDeserializing] and [OnDeserialized] attributes. I could have defined a bool flag that I could use to control what gets run in the setter. This actually works on the server side but Silverlight doesn't have those attributes.
Any suggestions?
I would recommend not overloading the usage of these classes to perform logic. This is your service data contract. You shouldn't touch the Silverlight proxy classes that get generated. I recommend that you put your validation logic into other classes that you invoke after deserialization is complete. Otherwise, you might start getting errors in your serialization code when your errors are actually in your data.