I'm re-writing a Windows Phone app to make it cross platform using the excellent MvvmCross framework.
On Windows Phone I usually test DeviceNetworkInformation.IsNetworkAvailable to ensure I have a network connection before calling a REST service.
Is there a way of doing this in a cross-platform way using MvvmCross?
There is a cross-platform plugin Cirrious.MvvmCross.Plugins.Network specifically for Network functionality and this was originally built specifically to provide Reachability
However, sadly the WindowsPhone part of this isn't yet implemented! See https://github.com/MvvmCross/MvvmCross/blob/v3.1/Plugins/Cirrious/Network/Cirrious.MvvmCross.Plugins.Network.Phone/Plugin.cs
If you need Reachability within a cross-platform app including WindowsPhone, I'd probably opt for adding this Network plugin, and then also modifying your WindowsPhone Setup to register something like:
public class MyReachability : IMvxReachability
{
public bool IsHostReachable(string host)
return // something using DeviceNetworkInformation.IsNetworkAvailable
}
}
// registered in Setup using:
protected override void InitializeLastChance() {
base.InitializeLastChance();
Mvx.RegisterType<IMvxReachability, MyReachability>();
}
Longer term, I'd be happy to see a decent implementation pushed back into the MvvmCross repository.
Also linking this question to: MvvmCross Reachability on Windows Phone and Network state with mvvmcross?
I would like to use log4net in mvvmcross to replace MvxDebugTrace, but I don't want to change the core source code, is it possible ?
Debugtrace is initialised inside setup in InitializeDebugServices.
Currently this is implemented on each platform using these steps (example is from Android):
https://github.com/slodge/MvvmCross/blob/v3/Cirrious/Cirrious.MvvmCross.Droid/Platform/MvxAndroidSetup.cs#L65
https://github.com/slodge/MvvmCross/blob/v3/Cirrious/Cirrious.MvvmCross/Platform/MvxSetup.cs#L55
This InitialiseDebugServices method is marked as virtual - so you can override it in your own Setup.cs class within each platform.
For building a bridge from mvx to log4net, you'll need to implement this simple IMvxTrace interface - https://github.com/slodge/MvvmCross/blob/v3/CrossCore/Cirrious.CrossCore/Platform/IMvxTrace.cs
With this done... on each platform you should be able to implement a MySpecialTrace which implements IMvxTrace, and then you should be able to initialise it in Setup using:
protected override void InitializeDebugServices()
{
Mvx.RegisterSingleton<IMvxTrace>(new MySpecialTrace());
MvxTrace.Initialize();
}
Currently I'am developing a game using cocos2d-x.
Of course, for multi-platform use.
basically I use a xcode for coding and development.
I want to attach IAP(In app purchases) separately to each coding for iPhone and Android
Problem to try to call a function of a certain class in Android that did not work.
Sources include the following:
cpp side
MyClass::invoke_init()
{
JavaVM* jvm = JniHelper::getJavaVM();
JNIEnv* env;
jvm->GetEnv((void **) &env, JNI_VERSION_1_2);
jclass cls;
jmethodID method;
cls = env->FindClass("com/joycestudios/game/SampleActivity");
method = env->GetMethodID(cls, "initFunc", "()V");
env->CallVoidMethod(cls, method);
}
java side
public class SampleActivity extends Cocos2dxActivity
{
public void initFunc()
{
Log.v("LOG_INFO", "initFunc()");
}
}
The first test as follows: I'm in progress.
build from xcode and build from build_natvie.sh and last build from eclipse.
But after run on eclipse, Just black screen and shuts down.
How to call a function of a java class?
What I looked at several samples, including also analyze the problem, I do not see any problems?
Can you tell if you find any error log?
First check if your game is working fine on android..
Den we can have a look how to call the function.
Generally for calling native method I use MessageJni class available in Cocos2d-x library.
I create my methods in MessageJni class which calls for native methods.
Its easy and convenient way of calling native methods.
Just google using MessageJni class. It will ease your work.
:)
do any other .NET IoC containers provide equivalent functionality to the typed factory facility in Castle Windsor?
e.g. if I am using an abstract factory pattern in a WPF application:
public class MyViewModel
{
private IAnotherViewModelFactory factory;
public void ShowAnotherViewModel()
{
viewController.ShowView(factory.GetAnotherViewModel());
}
}
I don't want to have to create a manual implementation of IAnotherViewModelFactory for every type of ViewModel I wish to show, I want the container to take care of this for me.
AutoFac has a feature called Delegate Factories, but as far as I can tell, it works only with delegates, and not interfaces.
I haven't encountered anything similar to Castle's Typed Factory Facility in neither StructureMap nor Unity, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they're not there...
The only way I can imagine that something like this could be implemented for interfaces is via a dynamic proxy. Since Castle Windsor has a Dynamic Proxy, but few other containers have anything similar, this might go a long way to explain why this feature isn't ubiquitous.
Unity also offers interception capabilities, so it must have some sort of dynamic proxy implementation, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't have anything equivalent to Typed Factories. Compared to other containers, Unity is rather basic.
In Autofac you can implement typed factories on top of the delegate approach Mark mentions. E.g.
class AnotherViewModelFactory : IAnotherViewModelFactory {
Func<AnotherViewModel> _factory;
public AnotherViewModelFactory(Func<AnotherViewModel> factory) {
_factory = factory;
}
public AnotherViewModel GetAnotherViewModel() {
return _factory();
}
}
If this class is registered with the container, along with AnotherViewModel Autofac will provide the Func<AnotherViewModel> implementation implicitly:
builder.RegisterType<AnotherViewModel>();
builder.RegisterType<AnotherViewModelFactory>()
.As<IAnotherViewModelFactory>();
Practically any interface you can implement using Typed Factory Facility can be implemented in Autofac using this kind of approach. The primary difference is that the Windsor implementation configures the factory through the component registration API, while in Autofac the factory is a component in its own right.
For more sophisticated examples you might like to look at: http://code.google.com/p/autofac/wiki/RelationshipTypes and http://nblumhardt.com/2010/01/the-relationship-zoo/.
I have recently implemented an equivalent of Castle Windsor Typed Factories for Unity. You can find the project at https://github.com/PombeirP/Unity.TypedFactories, and the NuGet package at http://nuget.org/packages/Unity.TypedFactories.
The usage is the following:
unityContainer
.RegisterTypedFactory<IFooFactory>()
.ForConcreteType<Foo>();
The parameter matching is done by name, which is fine for my needs, although the library could easily be extended to support other needs.
Method chaining is the only way I know to build fluent interfaces.
Here's an example in C#:
John john = new JohnBuilder()
.AddSmartCode("c#")
.WithfluentInterface("Please")
.ButHow("Dunno");
Assert.IsNotNull(john);
[Test]
public void Should_Assign_Due_Date_With_7DayTermsVia_Invoice_Builder()
{
DateTime now = DateTime.Now;
IInvoice invoice = new InvoiceBuilder()
.IssuedOn(now)
.WithInvoiceNumber(40)
.WithPaymentTerms(PaymentTerms.SevenDays)
.Generate();
Assert.IsTrue(invoice.DateDue == now.AddDays(7));
}
So how do others create fluent interfaces. How do you create it? What language/platform/technology is needed?
The core idea behind building a fluent interface is one of readability - someone reading the code should be able to understand what is being achieved without having to dig into the implementation to clarify details.
In modern OO languages such as C#, VB.NET and Java, method chaining is one way that this is achieved, but it's not the only technique - two others are factory classes and named parameters.
Note also that these techniques are not mutually exclusive - the goal is to maximize readabilty of the code, not purity of approach.
Method Chaining
The key insight behind method chaining is to never have a method that returns void, but to always return some object, or more often, some interface, that allows for further calls to be made.
You don't need to necessarily return the same object on which the method was called - that is, you don't always need to "return this;".
One useful design technique is to create an inner class - I always suffix these with "Expression" - that exposes the fluent API, allowing for configuration of another class.
This has two advantages - it keeps the fluent API in one place, isolated from the main functionality of the class, and (because it's an inner class) it can tinker with the innards of the main class in ways that other classes cannot.
You may want to use a series of interfaces, to control which methods are available to the developer at a given point in time.
Factory Classes
Sometimes you want to build up a series of related objects - examples include the NHibernate Criteria API, Rhino.Mocks expectation constraints and NUnit 2.4's new syntax.
In both of these cases, you have the actual objects you are storing, but to make them easier to create there are factory classes providing static methods to manufacture the instances you require.
For example, in NUnit 2.4 you can write:
Assert.That( result, Is.EqualTo(4));
The "Is" class is a static class full of factory methods that create constraints for evaluation by NUnit.
In fact, to allow for rounding errors and other imprecision of floating point numbers, you can specify a precision for the test:
Assert.That( result, Is.EqualTo(4.0).Within(0.01));
(Advance apologies - my syntax may be off.)
Named Parameters
In languages that support them (including Smalltalk, and C# 4.0) named parameters provide a way to include additional "syntax" in a method call, improving readability.
Consider a hypothetical Save() method that takes a file name, and permissions to apply to the file after saving:
myDocument.Save("sampleFile.txt", FilePermissions.ReadOnly);
with named parameters, this method could look like this:
myDocument.Save(file:"SampleFile.txt", permissions:FilePermissions.ReadOnly);
or, more fluently:
myDocument.Save(toFile:"SampleFile.txt", withPermissions:FilePermissions.ReadOnly);
You can create a fluent interface in any version of .NET or any other language that is Object Oriented. All you need to do is create an object whose methods always return the object itself.
For example in C#:
public class JohnBuilder
{
public JohnBuilder AddSmartCode(string s)
{
// do something
return this;
}
public JohnBuilder WithfluentInterface(string s)
{
// do something
return this;
}
public JohnBuilder ButHow(string s)
{
// do something
return this;
}
}
Usage:
John = new JohnBuilder()
.AddSmartCode("c#")
.WithfluentInterface("Please")
.ButHow("Dunno");
AFAIK, the term fluent interface does not specify a specific technology or framework, but rather a design pattern. Wikipedia does have an extensive example of fluent interfaces in C♯.
In a simple setter method, you do not return void but this. That way, you can chain all of the statements on that object which behave like that. Here is a quick example based on your original question:
public class JohnBuilder
{
private IList<string> languages = new List<string>();
private IList<string> fluentInterfaces = new List<string>();
private string butHow = string.Empty;
public JohnBuilder AddSmartCode(string language)
{
this.languages.Add(language);
return this;
}
public JohnBuilder WithFluentInterface(string fluentInterface)
{
this.fluentInterfaces.Add(fluentInterface);
return this;
}
public JohnBuilder ButHow(string butHow)
{
this.butHow = butHow;
return this;
}
}
public static class MyProgram
{
public static void Main(string[] args)
{
JohnBuilder johnBuilder = new JohnBuilder().AddSmartCode("c#").WithFluentInterface("Please").ButHow("Dunno");
}
}
Sometime ago I had the same doubts you are having now. I've done some research and now I'm writing a series of blog posts about techinics of designing a fluent interface.
Check it out at:
Guidelines to Fluent Interface design in C# part 1
I have a section there about Chaining X Nesting that can be interesting to you.
In the following posts I will talk about it in a deeper way.
Best regards,
André Vianna
Fluent interface is achieved in object oriented programming by always returning from your methods the same interface that contains the method. Consequently you can achieve this effect in java, javascript and your other favorite object oriented languages, regardless of version.
I have found this technique easiest to accomplish through the use of interfaces:
public interface IFoo
{
IFoo SetBar(string s);
IFoo DoStuff();
IFoo SetColor(Color c);
}
In this way, any concrete class that implements the interface, gets the fluent method chaining capabilities. FWIW.. I wrote the above code in C# 1.1
You will find this technique littered throughout the jQuery API
A couple of things come to mind that are possible in .Net 3.5/C# 3.0:
If an object doesn't implement a fluent interface, you could use Extension Methods to chain your calls.
You might be able to use the object initialization to simulate fluent, but this only works at instantiation time and would only work for single argument methods (where the property is only a setter). This seems hackish to me, but the there it is.
Personally, I don't see anything wrong with using function chaining if you are implementing a builder object. If the builder object has chaining methods, it keeps the object you are creating clean. Just a thought.
This is how I've built my so called fluent interfaces or my only forary into it
Tokenizer<Bid> tkn = new Tokenizer<Bid>();
tkn.Add(Token.LambdaToken<Bid>("<YourFullName>", b => Util.CurrentUser.FullName))
.Add(Token.LambdaToken<Bid>("<WalkthroughDate>",
b => b.WalkThroughDate.ToShortDateString()))
.Add(Token.LambdaToken<Bid>("<ContactFullName>", b => b.Contact.FullName))
.Cache("Bid")
.SetPattern(#"<\w+>");
My example required .net 3.5 but that's only cause of my lambda's. As Brad pointed out you can do this in any version of .net. Although I think lambda's make for more interesting possibilities such as this.
======
Some other good examples are nHibernate's Criteria API, there is also a fluent nhibernate extension for configuring nhibernate but I've never used it
Dynamic keyword in C# 4.0 will make it possible to write dynamic style builders. Take a look at following article about JSON object construction.