C# – EF Code First not generating table for ICollection

asp.net-mvccef-code-firstentity-framework

I would like the below ICollection property in one of my data classes (let's call it "Foo")

public class Foo
{
    [Key]
    public int FooId { get; set; }
    public string SomeValueOrOther { get; set; }
    public virtual ICollection<string> AllowedBars { get; set; }
}

I can add the string values when using the entity context, but they don't "go anywhere". In other words, no table is generated to represent this relationship and therefore no values are saved. What I would expect is a table with two columns, one for "FooId" and one for "AllowedBar" and for EF to map this to the collection automatically (as it does in with complex types).

As this doesn't happen, I've had to create a class called "FooAllowedBar" with the two properties I've described above.

This displeases me because it's the only "join" type class I have in the entire project. It works, of course, so one box is ticked, but does anybody know of a way to get EF to generate a table for the string collection relationship? (Or int, or datetime etc etc)

It may well be, from the little info that's out there on EF (still!) that this type of functionality is not (yet) supported. By I'd just like to get close to a definitive answer.

Many thanks in advance,
Rob

Best Answer

EF can only work with entity classes. Each entity class must have defined primary key so the minimum in your scenario is:

public class StringData
{
    public int Id { get; set; }
    public string Data { get; set; }
}

or worse

public class StringData
{
    [Key]
    public string Data { get; set; }
}

Now you can define collection of StringData to map it as related table:

public virtual ICollection<StringData> AllowedBars { get; set; }

Related Solutions

Asp.net-mvc – How to render an ASP.NET MVC view as a string

Here's what I came up with, and it's working for me. I added the following method(s) to my controller base class. (You can always make these static methods somewhere else that accept a controller as a parameter I suppose)

MVC2 .ascx style

protected string RenderViewToString<T>(string viewPath, T model) {
  ViewData.Model = model;
  using (var writer = new StringWriter()) {
    var view = new WebFormView(ControllerContext, viewPath);
    var vdd = new ViewDataDictionary<T>(model);
    var viewCxt = new ViewContext(ControllerContext, view, vdd,
                                new TempDataDictionary(), writer);
    viewCxt.View.Render(viewCxt, writer);
    return writer.ToString();
  }
}

Razor .cshtml style

public string RenderRazorViewToString(string viewName, object model)
{
  ViewData.Model = model;
  using (var sw = new StringWriter())
  {
    var viewResult = ViewEngines.Engines.FindPartialView(ControllerContext,
                                                             viewName);
    var viewContext = new ViewContext(ControllerContext, viewResult.View,
                                 ViewData, TempData, sw);
    viewResult.View.Render(viewContext, sw);
    viewResult.ViewEngine.ReleaseView(ControllerContext, viewResult.View);
    return sw.GetStringBuilder().ToString();
  }
}

Edit: added Razor code.

C# – What are the true benefits of ExpandoObject

Since I wrote the MSDN article you are referring to, I guess I have to answer this one.

First, I anticipated this question and that's why I wrote a blog post that shows a more or less real use case for ExpandoObject: Dynamic in C# 4.0: Introducing the ExpandoObject.

Shortly, ExpandoObject can help you create complex hierarchical objects. For example, imagine that you have a dictionary within a dictionary:

Dictionary<String, object> dict = new Dictionary<string, object>();
Dictionary<String, object> address = new Dictionary<string,object>();
dict["Address"] = address;
address["State"] = "WA";
Console.WriteLine(((Dictionary<string,object>)dict["Address"])["State"]);

The deeper is the hierarchy, the uglier is the code. With ExpandoObject it stays elegant and readable.

dynamic expando = new ExpandoObject();
expando.Address = new ExpandoObject();
expando.Address.State = "WA";
Console.WriteLine(expando.Address.State);

Second, as it was already pointed out, ExpandoObject implements INotifyPropertyChanged interface which gives you more control over properties than a dictionary.

Finally, you can add events to ExpandoObject like here:

class Program
{
   static void Main(string[] args)
   {
       dynamic d = new ExpandoObject();

       // Initialize the event to null (meaning no handlers)
       d.MyEvent = null;

       // Add some handlers
       d.MyEvent += new EventHandler(OnMyEvent);
       d.MyEvent += new EventHandler(OnMyEvent2);

       // Fire the event
       EventHandler e = d.MyEvent;

       e?.Invoke(d, new EventArgs());
   }

   static void OnMyEvent(object sender, EventArgs e)
   {
       Console.WriteLine("OnMyEvent fired by: {0}", sender);
   }

   static void OnMyEvent2(object sender, EventArgs e)
   {
       Console.WriteLine("OnMyEvent2 fired by: {0}", sender);
   }
}

Also, keep in mind that nothing is preventing you from accepting event arguments in a dynamic way. In other words, instead of using EventHandler, you can use EventHandler<dynamic> which would cause the second argument of the handler to be dynamic.

Best Answer

Related Solutions

Asp.net-mvc – How to render an ASP.NET MVC view as a string

C# – What are the true benefits of ExpandoObject

Related Topic