views:

538

answers:

5

Ok. So I have some code that maps certain controls on a winForm to certain properties in an object, in order to do certain things to the controls when certain things happen to the data. All well and good, works fine. Not the problem. The issue is, to add items to the mapping, I call a function that looks like:

this.AddMapping(this.myControl,myObject,"myObjectPropertyName");

The problem I run into is that it is very difficult to tell, at compile time, the difference between the above line and the below:

this.AddMapping(this.myControl,myObject,"myObjectPropretyName");

Since the last parameter is a string, there's no compile time checking or anything like that that would enforce that the string itself actually corresponds to a valid property name on the given object. Additionally, things like Refactor and "Find All References" miss out on this sort of reference, resulting in hilarity when the name of the property itself changes. So what I'm wondering is if there's some way to change the function such that what I'm passing in is still a string representing the property name in some way, but with compile time checking of the actual value going in. Someone said I could do this with Expression Trees, but I've read up on them and don't seem to see the connection. I'd love to do something like:

this.AddMapping(this.myControl,myObject,myObject.myObjectPropertyName);

or even

this.AddMapping(this.myControl,myObject.myObjectPropertyName);

would be sweet!

Any ideas?

+1  A: 

You really shouldn't be passing String literals in as property names. Instead you should be using YourClass.PROPERTY_NAME_FOO.

You should declare these Strings as consts in your class.

public const String PROPERTY_NAME_FOO = "any string, it really doesn't matter";
public const String PROPERTY_NAME_BAR = "some other name, it really doesn't matter";

Or, you don't have to worry about Strings at all, just property names:

public const int PROPERTY_NAME_FOO = 0;
public const int PROPERTY_NAME_BAR = 1; //values don't matter, as long as they are unique

That would stop strings that don't refer to a valid property from getting into function calls.

Intelisense will be able to show you the property names from within your class as suggestions for auto complete.

jjnguy
I thought of that, the only thing that bothers me is that its redundant... You're now maintaining property information in 2 seperate places (the const string and the property name itself) which seems less than optimal.
GWLlosa
You really don't have to use a String. You could just map them to ints or whatever. It is the name that is important, and the fact that the values are unique.
jjnguy
But if I don't map them to strings, how do I eventually get a string value?
GWLlosa
Well, if you need some sort of string literal for printing then you would have to use strings. Otherwise, always use the property name from the class to refer to the property, not the int/string value.
jjnguy
There is no reason to display the literal value of the property name, as long as you know the property name, you don't need any more information.
jjnguy
Intelisense will be able to show you the property names from within your class as suggestions for auto complete.
jjnguy
Sometimes, the names are important - if you are using data-binding etc. Which is especially painful if you use obfuscation ;-p Of course, using things like Expression side-steps this, by using the MemberInfo directly.
Marc Gravell
+8  A: 

in 3.5, Expression is one way to specify member names as code; you could have:

public void AddMapping<TObj,TValue>(Control myControl, TObj myObject,
       Expression<Func<TObj, TValue>> mapping) {...}

and then parse the expression tree to get the value. A little inefficient, but not too bad.

Here's example code:

    public void AddMapping<TSource, TValue>(
        Control control,
        TSource source,
        Expression<Func<TSource, TValue>> mapping)
    {
        if (mapping.Body.NodeType != ExpressionType.MemberAccess)
        {
            throw new InvalidOperationException();
        }
        MemberExpression me = (MemberExpression)mapping.Body;
        if (me.Expression != mapping.Parameters[0])
        {
            throw new InvalidOperationException();
        }
        string name = me.Member.Name;
        // TODO: do something with "control", "source" and "name",
        // maybe also using "me.Member"
    }

called with:

    AddMapping(myControl, foo, f => f.Bar);
Marc Gravell
+2  A: 

Consider using lambdas or even System.Linq.Expressions for this, with one of:

extern void AddMapping<T,U>(Control control, T target, Func<T,U> mapping);
extern void AddMapping<T,U>(Control control, T target, Expression<Func<T,U>> mapping);

Then call it with

this.AddMapping(this.myControl, myObject, (x => x.PropertyName));

Use the Expression argument if you need to take apart the abstract syntax tree at runtime, to do reflective things like obtain the property name as a string; alternatively, let the delegate do the job of fishing out the data you need.

Jeffrey Hantin