Glenn Block - All Comments

re: ForEach, a simple but very useful extension method

wekempf — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 13:19:44 GMT

I posted on your blog as well, but the gist of my post is that to those who have used other functional languages, it is clear that ForEach should not be chainable.

re: ForEach, a simple but very useful extension method

Greg Beech — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 11:02:09 GMT

I left a full response on my blog post (where wekempf also posted a comment). The essence is that not all LINQ operations are chainable or deferred, but all operations that are chainable are also deferred, and vice versa. As it isn't clear whether ForEach should be chainable, it isn't clear whether it should be deferred.

re: Firing generic events with EventAggregator

Glenn Block — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 09:14:28 GMT

@Udi, the event implementation we shipped with Prism actually does bind the two. CompositeWpfEvent<T> is bound to the parameters.

This implementation (which needs a bunch of cleaning) is for dynamically creating an event from a string.

2008 August 25 - Links for today « My (almost) Daily Links

2008 August 25 - Links for today « My (almost) Daily Links — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 23:25:38 GMT

Pingback from 2008 August 25 - Links for today « My (almost) Daily Links

re: ForEach, a simple but very useful extension method

wekempf — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 20:03:23 GMT

Both Yoshi Carroll in the comment above, and Greg Beech in his linked post comment that Linq uses deferred execution and chaining. That's simply not true. Some parts of Linq follow this, but not all. Just one example is Average, which is neither chainable nor does deferred execution. I can't begin to guess why ForEach was left out, but it seems obvious that's not why.

re: Firing generic events with EventAggregator

Udi Dahan: The Software Simplist — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 19:17:13 GMT

Fixing the link in the previous comment:

www.udidahan.com/.../domain-events-take-2

re: Firing generic events with EventAggregator

Udi Dahan: The Software Simplist — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 13:59:41 GMT

I've got to say that the fact that the definition of the event (const string) is separate from the parameter definition is... unfortunate.

I think it would be simpler to keep the definition of events/commands in one place like this:

public static class DomainEvents

{

public static readonly DomainEvent<IProduct> ProductReportedLost = new DomainEvent<IProduct>;

public static readonly DomainEvent<ICart> CartIsFull = new DomainEvent<ICart>;

}

This holds for composite client commands and server-side domain model events.

I've got the infrastructure that supports this up on my post <a href="www.udidahan.com/.../">Domain Events - Take 2</a>.

Thoughts?

re: ForEach, a simple but very useful extension method

Greg Beech — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 15:35:07 GMT

My assumption as to why the Enumerable class doesn't provide a ForEach extension method is because there are a number of valid implementations, using either deferred or immediate execution. I wrote more about this a couple of months back: gregbeech.com/.../why-doesn-t-system-linq-enumerable-have-a-foreach-extension-method.aspx

Dew Drop - August 23, 2008 | Alvin Ashcraft's Morning Dew

Dew Drop - August 23, 2008 | Alvin Ashcraft's Morning Dew — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 14:17:25 GMT

Pingback from Dew Drop - August 23, 2008 | Alvin Ashcraft's Morning Dew

re: Firing generic events with EventAggregator

Sean Feldman — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 14:36:37 GMT

Is there a road map for Prism project? Would be interestng to know where are you heading with it. Thank you.

Firing generic events with EventAggregator

Community Blogs — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 11:01:59 GMT

It's been a while since i posted anything on Prism. When I left p&p, i said you would see more

Firing generic events with EventAggregator

Glenn Block — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 10:11:43 GMT

It's been a while since i posted anything on Prism. When I left p&p, i said you would see more

re: ForEach, a simple but very useful extension method

Zack Owens — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 19:48:24 GMT

Any reason you didn't check for nulls?

re: Using ViewModels and DataTemplates to compose your UI

Mike — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 17:39:45 GMT

Thanks for the reply...I'm VERY new to this whole MVx architecture and it's got my head spinning...it seems the more I read, the more I become confused because everyone has a different opinion on how to implement a pattern...anyway...

In the example above I could/would create a property called City on the EmployeeModel and then that property would be populated with a generic list that is created by a call to a datastore (via DAL) that would retrieve the list of cities?

Thanks so much for responding...

re: Using ViewModels and DataTemplates to compose your UI

Glenn Block — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 06:37:57 GMT

Hi @Mike

What you can do is hang your combo list off of your presentation model as a property, say a List<String>, or a List<City> Then just bind to it.

Because its a ViewModel, you can decorate it with whatever it needs tot drive the UI.