There's so many out there (plenty of which are made by Paul's colleagues at WPF Deciples) at the moment the hardest part is making a choice...
Caliburn (Codeplex) Calcium (codeplex) MVVM Light (galasoft) Cinch (codeplex) MVVM Foundation (codeplex) Ocean (Karl on WPF) WPF Onyx (codeplex) MicroModels (paulstovell.com) I've used MVVM Light, Cinch and Ocean.. I'm currently looking at Calcium.... I wish there was a combination of all for a best of breed solution.. Paul, maybe you could organise this project, or plant the seed, with your WPF Deciple colleagues and start a WPF Deciples MVVM Framework where the best bits of all the frameworks are bought together ? On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 8:12 PM, Rui Miguel Pires Soares Marinho < [email protected]> wrote: > MVVM light imo it's a great framework to start with mvvm and even for > complex scenarios, it helps alot having templates to start your projects. > > > > regards Rui > > > > *Rui Marinho*** > > *Software Developer* > > *_____________________________________________________*** > > *M:*** > > *T:* > > +351 914408168 > > +351 912358027 > > Hospital *São João*** > > Alameda Professor Hernâni Monteiro > > 4200-319 Porto > > > > > > > > *De:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *Em > nome de *Adrian Hara > *Enviada:* terça-feira, 16 de Março de 2010 15:59 > *Para:* ozWPF > *Assunto:* RE: MicroModels question > > > > Hi Paul, > > > > Thanks for the reply. > > > > It’s too bad that you don’t intend on improving the MicroModels framework, > I find it’s really cool. What MVVM Framework do you use or recommend in your > daily work? > > > > Adrian > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > *On Behalf Of *Paul Stovell > *Sent:* Tuesday, March 16, 2010 11:49 AM > *To:* ozWPF > *Subject:* RE: MicroModels question > > > > Hi Adrian, > > > > The implementation should probably do that as it does allow some things to > work. Personally I never really liked that event – I find it very half-baked > and crying out as a performance bottleneck – so it’s never front-of-mind > when writing custom delegates. > > > > What I would have liked to have done would be to use expression > dependencies to trigger the CanExecuteChanged event. So something like this > would work: > > > > Command("Save", ()=>DoSave(), () => HasChanges) > > > > The command’s CanExecuteChanged event would be raised whenever HasChanges > property changed event is raised. > > > > I should add - as it wasn’t clear on my initial blog post – that > MicroModels was a “throw it out and see if it sticks” project. The code > isn’t very mature and I don’t have any plans to improve on it, it was purely > a fun thing (unlike Magellan which I am using and do maintain). If it’s > working for you then that’s good but expect to make a few changes as you > have done J > > > > Paul > > > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > *On Behalf Of *Adrian Hara > *Sent:* Tuesday, 16 March 2010 5:04 PM > *To:* ozWPF > *Subject:* RE: MicroModels question > > > > Hi Paul, > > > > Thanks for the answer, this is exactly what I did, I was just wondering if > there was a more MicroModelsy solution J > > > > In the meantime I’ve another question: why doesn’t the MicroModels > implementation of DelegateCommand use CommandManager.RequerySuggested for > its implementation of the CanExecuteChanged event? I found that using the > current implementation doesn’t requery the CanExecute delegate when the UI > state changes (i.e. it’s only queried once, when the command is bound, then > never again). > > > > I changed the implementation of the CanExecuteChanged event to look like > so: > > > > public event EventHandler CanExecuteChanged > > { > > add { CommandManager.RequerySuggested += value; } > > remove { CommandManager.RequerySuggested -= value; } > > } > > > > …and now the CanExecute delegate is requeried whenever the UI state changes > (e.g. user presses a button). > > > > What do you think about this, is this ok? > > > > Thanks, > > Adrian > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > *On Behalf Of *Paul Stovell > *Sent:* Tuesday, March 16, 2010 1:35 AM > *To:* ozWPF > *Subject:* RE: MicroModels question > > > > Hi Adrian, > > > > I haven’t tried, but something like this might work: > > > > private Foo _foo; > > > > public Foo Foo > > { > > get { return _foo; } > > set { _foo = value; NotifyChanged("Foo"); } > > } > > > > public FooViewModel(Foo foo, Baz baz) > { > Foo = foo; > > Property(() => Foo.Bar); > > > > baz.SomeEvent += () => Foo = new Foo(); > } > > > > By doing this, the MicroModels expression walker should also subscribe to > the Foo property change event and re-evaluate when it changes. > > > > Paul > > > > > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > *On Behalf Of *Adrian Hara > *Sent:* Monday, 15 March 2010 7:16 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* MicroModels question > > > > Hi, > > > > I’m playing with the very-cool MicroModels framework from Paul Stovell, but > I have a question. Suppose I have this view model > > > > Class FooViewModel : MicroModel > > { > > Public FooViewModel(Foo foo, Baz baz) > { > > Property(() => foo.Bar); > > > > baz.SomeEvent += () => foo = new Foo(); > } > } > > > > So the idea is that the underlying domain object upon which the view model > is based (in this case the instance of Foo) can change (e.g. in response to > some event). In this case the micro-model properties are “lost”, i.e. they > are still “subscribed” to the old instance of Foo and not to the new one. > > > > What would be a good solution in this case so the properties get re-wired > to use the new instance of Foo? > > > > Thanks, > > Adrian > > _______________________________________________ > ozwpf mailing list > [email protected] > http://prdlxvm0001.codify.net/mailman/listinfo/ozwpf > >
_______________________________________________ ozwpf mailing list [email protected] http://prdlxvm0001.codify.net/mailman/listinfo/ozwpf
