I have a simple ASP.NET WebApi ODataV4 controller -
public class FooController : ODataController
{
[HttpPost]
public string Post([FromBody] Foo fooObj)
{
...
}
}
The Foo model is as below and Foo is defined as an EntityType in the EDM model -
public class
{
[Key]
string id {get ; set;}
string name {get; set;}
}
I generated ODataClient for this model and trying to Post a new Foo object -
FooContext container = new FooContext(..);
Foo newFoo = new Foo()
{
name = "Simple foo"
}
container.AddToFoos(newFoo );
When I do this, the 'fooObj' in the Post method is null. However when I set the the 'id' property in the request to a non-null value (even empty string), it seems to work fine -
Foo newFoo = new Foo()
{
id = "",
name = "Simple foo"
}
Any pointers what I am missing here?
If you take a look at your $metadata, the key property "id" is non-nullable. During your OData model registration, you should be able to set it to optional. I had a similar issue but I'm using Microsoft.AspNetCore.OData v7.0.1. I'm not sure what version of OData you are using but the way I did this was during the building of my model:
builder.EntityType<Foo>().Property(p => p.Id).IsOptional();
Related
Once again, I am facing an issue, this time with LINQ Expression builder and this time I am even struggling to find the reason why it's not working. I have a Database-First EF project with quite a few tables. For this specific case, I have to use 2 of them - DocHead and Contragent. MyService.metadata.cs looks like this:
[MetadataTypeAttribute(typeof(DocHead.DocHeadMetadata))]
public partial class DocHead
{
// This class allows you to attach custom attributes to properties
// of the DocHead class.
//
// For example, the following marks the Xyz property as a
// required property and specifies the format for valid values:
// [Required]
// [RegularExpression("[A-Z][A-Za-z0-9]*")]
// [StringLength(32)]
// public string Xyz { get; set; }
internal sealed class DocHeadMetadata
{
// Metadata classes are not meant to be instantiated.
private DocHeadMetadata()
{
}
public string doc_Code { get; set; }
public string doc_Name { get; set; }
public string doc_ContrCode { get; set; }
//...
[Include]
public Contragent Contragent { get; set; }
}
}
[MetadataTypeAttribute(typeof(Contragent.ContragentMetadata))]
public partial class Contragent
{
// This class allows you to attach custom attributes to properties
// of the Contragent class.
//
// For example, the following marks the Xyz property as a
// required property and specifies the format for valid values:
// [Required]
// [RegularExpression("[A-Z][A-Za-z0-9]*")]
// [StringLength(32)]
// public string Xyz { get; set; }
internal sealed class ContragentMetadata
{
// Metadata classes are not meant to be instantiated.
private ContragentMetadata()
{
}
public string Code { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
//...
I take some docHeads like this:
IQueryable<DocHead> docHeads = new MyEntities().DocHead;
Then I try to sort them like this:
docHeads = docHeads.OrderByDescending(x => x.Contragent.Name);
It is all working like I want it. I get those docHeads sorted by the name of the joined Contragent. My problem is that I will have to sort them by a field, given as a string parameter. I need to be able to write something like this:
string field = "Contragent.Name";
string linq = "docHeads = docHeads.OrderByDescending(x => x." + field + ")";
IQueryable<DocHead> result = TheBestLinqLibraryInTheWorld.PrepareLinqQueryable(linq);
Unfortunately, TheBestLinqLibraryInTheWorld does not exist (for now). So, I have set up a method as a workaround.
public static IQueryable<T> OrderByField<T>(this IQueryable<T> q, string SortField, bool Ascending)
{
var param = Expression.Parameter(typeof(T), "x");
var prop = Expression.Property(param, SortField); // normally returns x.sortField
var exp = Expression.Lambda(prop, param); // normally returns x => x.sortField
string method = Ascending ? "OrderBy" : "OrderByDescending";
Type[] types = new Type[] { q.ElementType, exp.Body.Type };
var mce = Expression.Call(typeof(Queryable), method, types, q.Expression, exp); // normally returns sth similar to q.OrderBy(x => x.sortField)
return q.Provider.CreateQuery<T>(mce);
}
Normally... yes, when it comes to own properties of the class DocHead - those prefixed with doc_. The disaster strikes when I call this method like this:
docHeads = docHeads.OrderByField<DocHead>("Contragent.Name", true); // true - let it be Ascending order
To be more specific, the exception in the title is thrown on line 2 of the method OrderByField():
var prop = Expression.Property(param, SortField);
In My.edmx (the model), the tables DocHead and Contragent have got a relation already set up for me, which is the following: 0..1 to *.
Once again, I have no problem writing "static" queries at all. I have no problem creating "dynamic" ones via the method OrderByField(), but only when it comes to properties of the class DocHead. When I try to order by a prop of the joined Contragent class - the disaster strikes. Any help will be greatly appretiated, thank you!
The problem is that Expression.Property method does not support nested properties. It does exactly what it says - creates expression that represents a property denoted by propertyName parameter of the object denoted by the expression parameter.
Luckily it can easily be extended. You can use the following simple Split / Aggregate trick anytime you need to create a nested property access expression:
var prop = SortField.Split('.').Aggregate((Expression)param, Expression.Property);
I'm following Scott Allen's MVC4 course on PluralSight (I'm using MVC5 and WebAPI2 but they should be the same) and I am trying to pass an object via HTTP PUT. The model binder should bind it, but I am getting NULL for the parameter.
public HttpResponseMessage PutObjective(int id, [FromBody] Objective objective)
{
if (ModelState.IsValid && id == objective.ObjectiveID)
{
//todo: update - look up id, replace text
return Request.CreateResponse(HttpStatusCode.OK, objective);
}
else
{
return Request.CreateResponse(HttpStatusCode.BadRequest);
}
}
and in my front-end javascript I am doing the following (I'm creating an object for testing, so ignore 'objective' passed in):
var updateObjective = function (objective) {
var myobj = { "ObjectiveID": "3", "ObjectiveDescription": "test" };
return $.ajax(objectiveApiUrl + "/" + objective.ObjectiveID, {
type: "PUT",
data: myobj
});
}
My class looks like this:
public class Objective
{
public int ObjectiveID { get; private set; }
public string ObjectiveDescription { get; set; }
public Objective (int Id, string Desc)
{
this.ObjectiveID = Id;
this.ObjectiveDescription = Desc;
}
}
Any thoughts on why 'objective' in the backend is always 'null' ?
I've done what Scott Allen is doing, even tried adding in [FromBody] but no luck. $.ajax should have the correct content type by default I understand, so no need to set it.
I had Fiddler2 but I'm unsure as to what I am looking at to be honest. I can see my object as JSON being sent to the backend.
Well, if you're familiar with Model Binding you'll have seen the issue in my Objective class:
public int ObjectiveID { get; private set; }
with a private set, no instance can be created of the Objective class. To make it work, the 'private' access specifier needs to be removed.
What needs to happen really is that Objective becomes ObjectiveViewModel, and we convert what comes back to an Objective domain object (which may have more properties than we need for this screen). This can have a private set.
Is it possible for a Controller method to handle all Posted items which derive from a particular base class? The idea is to be able to dispatch Commands by posting them to an endpoint. When I try the following, the "cmd" parameter in the Post method is always null.
Example
//the model:
public abstract class Command{
public int CommandId{get; set;}
}
public class CommandA:Command{
public string StringParam{get; set;}
}
public class CommandB:Command{
public DateTime DateParam{get; set;}
}
//and in the controller:
public HttpResponseMessage Post([FromBody]Command cmd)
{
//cmd parameter is always null when I Post a CommandA or CommandB
//it works if I have separate Post methods for each Command type
if (ModelState.IsValid)
{
if (cmd is CommandA)
{
var cmdA = (CommandA)cmd;
// do whatever
}
if (cmd is CommandB)
{
var cmdB = (CommandB)cmd;
//do whatever
}
//placeholder return stuff
var response = Request.CreateResponse(HttpStatusCode.Created);
var relativePath = "/api/ToDo/" + cmd.TestId.ToString();
response.Headers.Location = new Uri(Request.RequestUri, relativePath);
return response;
}
throw new HttpResponseException(HttpStatusCode.BadRequest);
}
Again, when I try this approach the Post method gets called, but the parameter is always null from the framework. However if I replace it with a Post method with a specific CommandA parameter type, it works.
Is what I'm attempting possible? Or does every message type need a separate handler method in the controller?
If you are sending data in Json format, then following blog gives more details about how hierarchies deserialization can be achieved in json.net:
http://dotnetbyexample.blogspot.com/2012/02/json-deserialization-with-jsonnet-class.html
This might be a stupid question! (n00b to AutoMapper and time-short!)
I want to use AutoMapper to map from EF4 entities to ViewModel classes.
1) If I call
CreateMap<ModelClass, ViewModelClass>()
then do I also need to call
CreateMap<ViewModelClass, ModelClass>()
to perform the reverse?
2) If two classes have the same property names, then do I need a CreateMap statement at all, or is this just for "specific/custom" mappings?
For the info of the people who stumble upon this question. There appears to be now a built-in way to achieve a reverse mapping by adding a .ReverseMap() call at the end of your CreateMap() configuration chain.
In AutoMapper you have a Source type and a Destination type. So you will be able to map between this Source type and Destination type only if you have a corresponding CreateMap. So to answer your questions:
You don't need to define the reverse mapping. You have to do it only if you intend to map back.
Yes, you need to call CreateMap to indicate that those types are mappable otherwise an exception will be thrown when you call Map<TSource, TDest> telling you that a mapping doesn't exist between the source and destination type.
I've used an extension method do mapping both ways
public static IMappingExpression<TDestination, TSource> BothWays<TSource, TDestination>
(this IMappingExpression<TSource, TDestination> mappingExpression)
{
return Mapper.CreateMap<TDestination, TSource>();
}
usage:
CreateMap<Source, Dest>().BothWays();
Yes, or you can call CreateMap<ModelClass, ViewModelClass>().ReverseMap().
If two classes have same Member(Property,Field,GetMethod()), you needn't call CreateMap<TSrc,TDest>. Actually, if every member in TDest are all exist in TSrc, you needn't call CreateMap<TSrc,TDest>. The following code works.
class Person
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public int Age { get; set; }
}
class Person2
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public int? Age { get; set; }
public DateTime BirthTime { get; set; }
}
public class NormalProfile : Profile
{
public NormalProfile()
{
//CreateMap<Person2, Person>();//
}
}
var cfg = new MapperConfiguration(c =>
{
c.AddProfile<NormalProfile>();
});
//cfg.AssertConfigurationIsValid();
var mapper = cfg.CreateMapper();
var s3 = mapper.Map<Person>(new Person2 { Name = "Person2" });
I'm trying to work out how to create a query using Linq to NHibernate.
I have two classes like this:
public class Foo
{
private ISet<Bar> _bars = new HashedSet<Bar>();
public virtual ISet<Bar> Bars
{
get { return _bars; }
set { _bars = value; }
}
}
public class Bar
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Color { get; set; }
}
Foo's Bar collection is mapped as a one-to-many component collection.
Now I want to run a query that should look something like this:
var myBar = new Bar { Name = "test", Color = "testColor" };
var matchingFoos = Session.Linq<Foo>
.Where(foo => foo.Bars.Contains(myBar),
new BarEqualityComparer())
.ToList();
I am not sure if this is correct, but whenever I run this query I get a NullReferenceException from inside a method called NHibernate.Linq.Visitors.WhereArgumentsVisitor.GetCollectionContainsCriteria method.
Could anyone help me out with an alternative means of running this query?
The BarEqualityComparer will be the point of failure for sure. There is no simple way for the provider to translate custom class to an SQL statement.