Monday, July 1, 2019

Linking Files in Visual Studio

Linking files in Visual Studio lets us use the same physical file in different projects. I always forget how to do this, so I'm making notes here.

The Short Version
If you already know about linking files and why you want to do it, here's the short version that has the mechanics (details are further down).

To link files, use the "Add Existing Item" dialog. One way of getting to this is to right-click on the project and choose "Add", then "Existing Item...".


When the dialog opens, locate the file you want to link to.


Then DO NOT CLICK THE "Add" BUTTON. Instead, notice that the "Add" button is a drop-down (this is really easy to overlook).


Use the drop-down and select "Add As Link".

That's all there is to it!

If you want details on what linking files really means and why you might want to do it, keep reading.

The Long Version
To show the differences between copying files and linking files, I've set up a solution with 3 class libraries.


The first library, "A-SourceLibrary", is a .NET Core 3.0 class library that contains the file we want to use in the other projects. The file is called "Person.cs".

The file system shows that we have a .csproj file and one .cs file:


The second library, "B-CopiedFiles", is a .NET Standard 2.0 class library that does not currently have any files.

The file system shows that we have a .csproj file only:


The third library, "C-LinkedFiles", is a .NET Framework 4.7.2 class library that does not currently have any files.

The file shows that we have only a .csproj file here as well:


Let's look at the difference between copying and linking.

Copying Files
Copying files from one project to another is out in the open (for the most part).

Copy/Paste
As one option, we can right-click on the source file and choose "Copy" and then right-click on the destination project and choose "Paste".

The keyboard shortcuts Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V also work as long as you have the correct items selected in the Solution Explorer.

Add Existing Item
Another way to copy a file is to Add an Existing Item. We will do this to copy the "Person.cs" file from the "A-SourceLibrary" project to the "B-CopiedFiles" project.

Just like above, you right-click on the project, and select "Add", then "Existing Item..."


When the dialog pops up, just locate the file.


And then click the "Add" button.

This will create a *copy* of the file in the destination project. We see the new file pop up in the Solution Explorer.


But we also see a new file pop up in the File Explorer for the project.


Now we have 2 separate copies of the "Person.cs" file. If we make changes to one file, it will not be reflected in the other.

If we only want 1 physical file that appears to multiple projects, we can use a linked file instead.

Linking Files
The problem I always have with linking files is that I forget how to do it. When I copy files from one project to another, I usually do the "Copy"/"Paste" options that show up in the right-click menu (or with the keyboard shortcuts).

When I want to link a file, I copy the file to my clipboard and the look for a "Paste Special" or something similar on the right-click menu. That doesn't exist. Then I have to try to remember how to do it. So here it is.

This time we will link to the "Person.cs" file in the "A-SourceLibrary" project in the "C-LinkedFiles" project.

As we saw above, we just need to right-click on the destination project ("C-LinkedFiled") and choose "Add" then "Existing Item..."


Then in the dialog, locate the source file in the "A-SourceLibrary" folder.


Then use the drop-down on the "Add" button to choose "Add As Link".


This adds a link to the file in the destination project. We can see that the "Person.cs" file shows up as part of the "C-LinkedFiles" project in Visual Studio.


But if we look at the file system, the "C-LinkedFiles" folder does *not* have a "Person.cs" file.


When we look at the Solution Explorer, we can see that there is a different icon for the linked file compared to the copied file (and the original file):


What we have done is create a reference in one project to a file in a different project. So if we make changes in one location, it is reflected in both.

Why Would We Want to Link Files?
So why would we want to do this? Usually if we want to use an existing class, we would reference that assembly and use it directly. This avoids duplication. And this is what I do when I can.

But in this scenario, we have 3 different class libraries all with different targets. In this case, we may not be able to reference one assembly from another. This example is a bit contrived, so let's explore something a little more realistic.

Transitioning to .NET Core
We are in a bit of a transition period with .NET. As of today, .NET Core 3.0 is still coming (it will be released on September). With .NET Core 3.0, we also get .NET Standard 2.1.

But most people have a lot of applications that are .NET Framework. If I have a .NET Framework 4.7.2 project, I will not be able to use a .NET Standard 2.1 library (only .NET Standard 2.0). While I'm moving my projects from .NET Framework 4.7.2 to .NET Core 3.0, I may want to set up some interim projects to help with the transition.

So I could create a .NET Standard 2.1 class library with the intention that this will be the library referenced by the .NET Core 3.0 project. And then I can create a .NET Standard 2.0 project (that links to the files in the .NET Standard 2.1 project) that I can use today with the .NET Framework project.

For anything that doesn't match up (for example, I might be using additional APIs in the .NET Standard 2.1 project -- like Task.IsCompletedSuccessfully), I can copy files and make custom shivs that will get me through the transition period.

Shared Libraries
Another place where linked files can come in handy is if we create shared libraries (or NuGet packages) that will be used in different environments. We may need code that is a bit different for each environment, but we can use linked files to share what we can.

WPF on .NET Core 3.0
Another place this is useful is when transitioning WPF from .NET Framework to .NET Core. Right now, the WPF designers in Visual Studio are not quite complete for .NET Core. (I'm hoping things will be awesome when it comes to release time.)

To help with the transition, we can have *both* a WPF .NET Framework project and a WPF .NET Core project. We can put our production forms (XAML) in the .NET Core project and link the files to the .NET Framework project.


Then we can use the XAML designer in the .NET Framework project and build/run the .NET Core project.

We only have one set of files to worry about.

Linking Files is Useful
Linking files is really useful. I used to do this quite a bit back in the Silverlight days (boy, I feel old now). Each class library would link to the same source files (sometimes with #if/#endif directives for conditional compilation).

When I got started experimenting with WPF on .NET Core 3.0, someone gave me the advice to link files to get the designers like mentioned above. That was great except that I completely forgot how to link files. So I dropped this here mainly for me to remember later.

Keep learning, and find somewhere to log the things you forget. Then you will have them available to you the next time.

Happy Coding!

Tuesday, April 2, 2019

Task.IsCompletedSuccessfully - YAY! (and hmmm)

So, apparently I missed something along the way. Task in C# has an "IsCompletedSuccessfully" property (in some environments). This has been around since .NET Core 2.0, and it is in the current 2.2 release (and the 3.0 preview).
The reason I love the idea of "IsCompletedSuccessfully" is that "IsCompleted" does not mean what you think it means.
But there are some caveats about which types of projects can use this property. More on that below.

The Problem of "IsCompleted"
I've been writing and speaking about Task and Await since 2015. It's one of those things that took me a while to understand and then became really useful to me.

One of the hurdles I had to deal with has to do with the "Is" properties on Task. These include "IsCanceled", "IsFaulted", and "IsCompleted".


The main problem with these properties is that they sound like they are mutually exclusive, meaning something will be *either* Canceled *or* Faulted *or* Completed. And that is not the case.

If we look at the documentation for "IsCompleted", we find the following remarks:


IsCompleted will return true when the task is in one of the three final states: RanToCompletion, Faulted, or Canceled.

So "IsCompleted" does not mean "completed successfully", it means "no longer running".

The usefulness of this property in Task continuations is limited. And because of the problems I had when I first came across it, I have talked about it in articles (Task Continuations), videos (Task and Await in C# - Part 3), and also in my live presentations (I'll Get Back to You: Task, Await, and Asynchronous Methods).

Note: the short version is that if we want to see if a Task completed successfully, we can use the Task.Status property (an enumeration) and look for "RanToCompletion".

With .NET Core 2.0 and later, we finally get the option that I've been waiting for.

IsCompletedSuccessfully
The "IsCompletedSuccessfully" property has been around since .NET Core 2.0. Somehow I missed it. It wasn't really a surprise that I missed it because I was mainly using Task in WPF projects (.NET Framework) and .NET Standard 2.0 class libraries. This property is not available in those environments (more on that in a bit).

First, let's look at the documentation (Task.IsCompletedSuccessfully Property):


The first thing to note is that the documentation is currently incomplete. It just tells us that the property exists, but it doesn't say what it is for. Based on previous experience (and a little experimentation), we can deduce that this tells us whether the task ended up in the "RanToCompletion" status.

Also note that this applies to .NET Core only. It has been available since .NET Core 2.0, and it is available in 2.1, 2.2, and the 3.0 Preview.

So, Yay! that this is available, and hmmm... let's figure out where we can really use this.

.NET Core vs. .NET Standard
The first thing to consider is that there is a difference between .NET Core and .NET Standard. With .NET Standard, we can create libraries that will compile in a variety of environments. I have created lots of .NET Standard libraries that can be used with WPF applications (using .NET Framework) and WebAPI applications (using .NET Core).

This is great because .NET Standard gives us a standard set of APIs that can be used by any project that supports that version of .NET Standard.

I've been using .NET Standard 2.0. This means that my libraries will work with .NET Core 2.0 (and above) and .NET Framework 4.6.1 (but more realistically, they work with .NET Framework 4.7.2 -- but that's another story).

The bad news is that "IsCompletedSuccessfully" is *not* available in .NET Standard 2.0.

This means that for my current projects using .NET Standard 2.0 and WPF with .NET Framework 4.7.2, this property is not available.

If we do want to use "IsCompletedSuccessfully" in a class library, we also have the option of creating a .NET Core class library. This has the restriction that we can only call it from a .NET Core project, so it will not work with a .NET Framework project like our .NET Standard libraries do.

The good news is that "IsCompletedSuccessfully" *is* available in .NET Standard 2.1.

It's important to understand that .NET Standard 2.1 is not really available yet. This will come along with .NET Core 3.0 which is still in preview.

To make things more "interesting", .NET Standard 2.1 will not be supported by .NET Framework 4.8. Here's an excerpt from Microsoft: "Announcing .NET Standard 2.1".
"Given many of the API additions in .NET Standard 2.1 require runtime changes in order to be meaningful, .NET Framework 4.8 will remain on .NET Standard 2.0 rather than implement .NET Standard 2.1. .NET Core 3.0 as well as upcoming versions of Xamarin, Mono, and Unity will be updated to implement .NET Standard 2.1."
So, we will not be able to use this property with .NET Framework 4.8.

Can I Use "IsCompletedSuccessfully"?
  • .NET Core 3.0: YES
  • .NET Standard 2.1: YES
  • .NET Core 2.0+ : YES
  • .NET Standard 2.0: No
  • .NET Framework 4.7.2: No
  • .NET Framework 4.8: No

Moving to .NET Core 3.0
With all of the changes that are happening in the .NET ecosystem, it is becoming more and more clear that we should be moving to .NET Core. For 2 examples, (1) .NET Framework 4.8 will not support .NET Standard 2.1, and (2) several C# 8 features will not be implemented in .NET Framework 4.8.

.NET Core 3.0 supports WinForms and WPF applications. I've done a few experiments with the Preview of .NET Core 3.0, and it works pretty well for the WPF applications that I've converted.

If we start to move to .NET Core, then things get easier in a lot of areas. The project systems are more compatible, we get runtime enhancements, and we can use .NET Standard 2.1.

We are in bit of a transitional period here. .NET Core 3.0 is still to be released. And even though Visual Studio 2019 works well with the .NET Core 3.0 Preview, the tooling for WinForms and WPF does not exist yet. There are some ways that we can manage WPF projects today, and I'll show that in an upcoming article.

If you haven't done so already, take a look at .NET Core. This is the future of .NET.

Happy Coding!

Sunday, March 31, 2019

Getting .NET Core 3 Preview to Work in Visual Studio 2019

UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE
The steps listed below work for Visual Studio 2019 prior to 16.2.

In 16.2, the setting to "Use previews of the .NET Core SDK" has moved to the "Enviroment > Preview Features" section of the Options dialog:


UPDATE ENDS

ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Visual Studio 2019 just released (okay, it releases on Tuesday), and you're probably anxious to try out .NET Core 3.0 -- but that has *not* been released yet, and release date is TBD. But you can still download the .NET Core 3.0 Preview and use it in Visual Studio 2019.

But it is not available by default. Here's the short version: you have to enable it explicitly in Visual Studio.


From the "Tools" menu, select "Options", then navigate to "Projects and Solutions". Under there, you'll find a ".NET Core" node, and that has the setting we need.

Just check "Use previews of the .NET Core SDK", and you're good to go.

A big thanks to Brian Lagunas' video that showed me how to do this: [SOLVED] .NET Core 3 is not working with Visual Studio 2019.

Longer Version
So a couple weeks ago, I was excited to try out some .NET Core 3.0 (Preview) stuff to see how it works. Since we are really close to launch for Visual Studio 2019, I grabbed the latest version (which was the RC (release candidate)).

Visual Studio 2019 is available here: https://visualstudio.microsoft.com/downloads/

I also installed the latest preview of .NET Core 3.0 SDK. That is available here: https://dotnet.microsoft.com/download/dotnet-core/3.0

Then I created a new .NET Core console application. The new project dialog does not have a way to select the .NET Core version, so I figured that I would just go to the Project Options and change it myself.

I was a bit dismayed to see that .NET Core 3.0 was not available in my target framework dropdown:


A quick search led me to Brian Lagunas' video (mentioned above).

So then all I needed to do was go to Tools -> Options -> Projects and Solutions -> .NET Core.


Then I just checked the option for "Use previews of the .NET Core SDK".

When I restarted Visual Studio 2019, I saw the option pop up in the project options:


And then I was working with .NET Core 3.0 (Preview).

Initial Impressions
My initial impressions of .NET Core 3.0 are good. This is especially important when we look at what's happening with the .NET ecosystem (more on that in later articles).

I was most curious about the WPF support. I've converted most of my sample applications to use .NET Standard for the libraries, and .NET Core for the services. But I still have some WPF projects which are .NET Framework.

I was able to convert several of my WPF projects from .NET Framework to .NET Core 3.0 (Preview), and they ran just fine. (In some ways, they run better because it solves the NuGet issue that I brought up previously.)

So I've got some more exploration to do. There is also a bit of untangling because some features are cross platform, some are not. Also, since .NET Standard 2.1 does not support .NET Framework, there are some things that we need to be aware of -- particularly since there is one specific feature that is in .NET Standard 2.1 that I'd like to start using as quickly as possible.

Happy Coding!

Monday, January 21, 2019

Weirdness with EF Core 2 (SQLite), .NET Standard, and .NET Framework

I've run into some issues referencing .NET Standard projects from a .NET Framework project -- specifically in regard to Entity Framework Core 2 and SQLite. I encountered this when moving some of my demo code to newer projects.

Here's the error that I get:


This is a missing DLL. I've managed to come up with 2 workarounds -- neither of which I like -- but they get the projects working.

Let's take a look at the project.

This article is technically *not* part of the More DI series of articles. However, the issue is present in the code described in that series. The code is available on GitHub: https://github.com/jeremybytes/di-decorators.

The Projects
The solution consists of 12 projects which are a mix of project types. Here are the full-framework projects:


The PeopleViewer project is a WPF application using .NET Framework 4.7.2.

The test projects are also .NET Framework due to current requirements of NUnit 3.x.

All of the "library" projects are .NET Standard 2.0:


The .NET Standard projects include the Presentation (which includes the view model), the Readers (including the CSV data reader, the SQL data reader, the Service data reader, and all of the decorators), and the Shared projects.

There is one .NET Core project:


This is the WebAPI service that provides data for the Service data reader.

Project References
Project references can get a bit weird when using .NET Standard with .NET Framework. When I was first having issues, I came across Scott Hanselman's article: Referencing .NET Standard Assemblies from both .NET Core and .NET Framework, and this helped. Let's see how.

Here are the dependencies from the "PersonReader.SQL" project (listed in the PersonReader.SQL.csproj file):


We can see the references to Entity Framework Core and SQLite.

The "PeopleViewer" project does not reference either of these NuGet packages directly:


Based on the advice provided in Scott Hanselman's article, I manually edited the "PeopleViewer.csproj" file to add a "RestoreProjectStyle" value of "PackageReference":


This took care of some of my issues: the ServiceReader works. But the SQLReader is still broken.

The Service Data Reader Works
The Service data reader project has a reference to NewtonSoft.Json (which is probably not a surprise):


By using the "PackageReference" setting, the correct version of the Newtonsoft.Json DLLs made it to the output folder of the "PeopleViewer" project.


You can look at the article "Adding Retry with the Decorator Pattern" for more information on running this code.

Be sure to read Scott Hanselman's article for the details on this setting and why it's needed.

The SQL Data Reader is Broken
But even with this setting, the SQL Data Reader is still broken. Let's take a closer look.

First, we'll update the "ComposeObjects" method to use the SQLReader object. This is in the "PeopleViewer" project, App.xaml.cs file -- although the code in the GitHub project is more complex than what we have here since it uses all of the decorators.


This builds a MainWindow that uses a PeopleReaderViewModel that uses a SQLReader.

When we run the application and click the "Refresh People" button, we get the error:


This indicates that we're missing a DLL that's needed for SQLite functionality.

If we check the output folder, we see that we have many Entity Framework DLLs, including one that references SQLite:


But "e_sqlite3.dll" is nowhere to be found.

As a side note, I tried this with the most recent version of EF Core/SQLite (version 2.2.1 at the time of writing) and had the same results.

I managed to work around this in 2 different ways. If there's a better solution, *PLEASE* let me know about it in the comments. I do not like either of these options.

Workaround #1: Include the NuGet Package in the .NET Framework Project
The first workaround I found was to include the Entity Framework Core / SQLite NuGet packages in the "PeopleViewer" project (the WPF application).

This works because the application now has all of the DLLs that it needs:


The "e_sqlite3.dll" is in the "x64" folder (and the "x86" folder as well).

Why I Don't Like This
I don't like this solution because it creates a dependency on a NuGet package that the .NET Framework project (the WPF application) does not explicitly need. The .NET Standard library (the SQL data reader) is the project that needs the package in order to work. This solution seems to mess up the dependency graph.

It can get a bit worse. If the version of the NuGet package referenced by the .NET Framework project is different from the version referenced in the .NET Standard project, there will be runtime errors. (I've run into this with Newtonsoft.Json references.)

Workaround #2: Copying the Needed Files to the Output Folder
The second workaround I came up with is to copy the missing files into the output folder. Since the bulk of the DLLs are making it to the output folder, I figured that just including the "e_sqlite3.dll" that's missing might be the best way to go.

To do this, I grabbed the "x64" and "x86" folders above, and put them into an "AdditionalFiles" folder at the root of the solution.


This folder already exists: it has the text file used by the CSV data reader (People.txt) as well as the SQLite database used by the SQL data reader (People.db). So adding a couple more files doesn't seem like too much of a problem.

The files are copied to the output folder using a post-build event on the "PeopleViewer" project:


This copies the contents of the "AdditionalFiles" folder to the output folder. For more information on Visual Studio build events, refer to "Using Build Events in Visual Studio to Make Life Easier".

The other thing I had to do was explicitly add these files to the Git repository. The .gitignore file doesn't usually include DLLs, so I had to add these two files manually. You can see them in the GitHub repository: https://github.com/jeremybytes/di-decorators/tree/master/AdditionalFiles/x64.

This has the same effect as Workaround #1: the files are added to the output folder:


Why I Don't Like This
The reason I don't like this workaround is the same as above: There's a good chance that the versions will get out of sync in the future. In addition, I don't like the idea of adding executable files to the Git repository.

Frustration
There is a bug somewhere. I'm not sure if it's a bug in the Entity Framework Core packages (specifically the SQLite package). I'm not sure if it's a conflict between the package management schemes in the .NET Standard project vs. the .NET Framework project. And I have to admit that this is a pretty big frustration for me.

The frustration is 2-fold -- first for myself. I've been coding in the .NET framework for close to 15 years. I really would not expect to have these types of difficulties, even with things that are relatively new. But as a developer, I deal with this type of issue all the time.

The bigger frustration is when I think about other developers. Many developers in the .NET space do not have the type of experience that I have. If I am having difficulty, then that means that there are a large number of other developers who will also have difficulty.

This is even a bigger concern since the bulk of my effort is spent helping developers learn more about C# and .NET -- in particular, I work with the "dark matter developers" described by Scott Hanselman . I have a fear that if we make things too complex in the environment, we will have difficulty getting new developers on board.

This is just one example of what is causing me concerns. The other items are a topic for another day.

Wrap Up
If you have any advice on handling this issue, please let me know. I would file a bug report, but as noted, I'm not exactly sure where the bug is.

If you have run into this same issue, understand that I do not like either of these workarounds. They add concerns about versioning. But they do get the code working, and that's always the first step.

Happy Coding!

Thursday, January 17, 2019

More DI: The Real Power of Decorators -- Stacking Functionality

Over the last several articles, we have looked at a decorator to add retry functionality, a decorator to log exceptions, and a decorator to add a client-side cache. We've seen that decorators let us easily add functionality without creating subclasses and without modifying our existing objects.

But the real power of decorators is that we can stack the functionality one piece at a time. (Okay, so there are several compelling reasons to use the decorator pattern even if we are not stacking functionality; but the stacking is really cool.)
Small pieces of functionality are easier to test. By stacking decorators, we can mix and match the pieces of functionality that we need.
This article is one of a series about dependency injection. The articles can be found here: More DI and the code is available on GitHub: https://github.com/jeremybytes/di-decorators.

The Data Reader Decorators
The decorators in the application operate on the "IPersonReader" interface (from the "Common" project, IPersonReader.cs file):


All of the decorators wrap the interface "IPersonReader" and also implement the interface "IPersonReader". This means that the decorators can wrap other decorators.

Let's see how this works step-by-step.

Behavior Without Decorators
For this article, we'll modify the "ComposeObjects" method in the startup of our application. This is in the "PeopleViewer" project, App.xaml.cs file. We'll start with just the behavior without decorators: using the web service data reader.

As a reminder, the code shown here is different from the final code in the GitHub project. If you'd like to follow along, just replace the code in the "ComposeObjects" method with what we have here.


This method puts together 3 objects. Starting from the last line, (1) we create a MainWindow instance; this is the main form of the application. The MainWindow needs a view model, so (2) we create a PeopleReaderViewModel instance to pass to the MainWindow. The view model needs an IPersonReader, so (3) we create a ServiceReader instance (to get data from a web service) and pass that to the view model.

A Nested Composition
As an alternative to this syntax, we can also use a "nested" syntax that gets rid of the intermediate variables. This is in the "AlternateComposeObjects" method in the same file.


This is a little easier to read since we can see what is nested in what. The "ServiceReader" is nested in the "PeopleReaderViewModel" which is nested in the "MainWindow".

I'll show both of these syntaxes along the way. They both have their pros and cons when it comes to readability.

Running the Application
As a reminder, to run the application we need to start the web service. This is in the "People.Service" project. The easiest way to start the service is to navigate a command window to the project folder, and type "dotnet run".


This shows the service listening on "http://localhost:9874", and you can navigate to "http://localhost:9874/api/people" to see the service in action.

Then we can run the application in Visual Studio. When we click the "Refresh People" button, we get data back.


Now we'll go back to the command window and stop the service with "Ctrl-C".


With the service stopped, click "Clear Data" and "Refresh People". Then we see the following error:


As a reminder, if the code stops in the debugger, just click "Continue" or press "F5" to run past the exception.

Now let's see what happens when we start adding functionality.

Adding a Retry Decorator
The first step is to add the decorator to retry the call if it fails. This described here: More DI: Adding Retry with the Decorator Pattern.

Here is the updated "ComposeObjects" method:


In this code, we wrap the "ServiceReader" in a "RetryReader". The RetryReader also needs a delay, so we pass in a TimeSpan of 3 seconds. When a call fails, the RetryReader will wait 3 seconds and try again, for a total of 3 attempts. After 3 attempts, it will return the exception from the wrapped data reader.

The nested syntax shows the relationships a bit more clearly:


We can see that the RetryReader wraps the ServiceReader.

Now if we run the application and click "Refresh People" (without re-starting the service), we wait 6 seconds before the failure (due to the delay and retry). If we restart the service after clicking the button, then the retry will work, and the application shows the data. See the original article for more details.

Stacking Decorators
To see the how we can stack functionality with decorators, we will add the exception logging decorator to our composition. We do this by wrapping the "RetryReader" in the "ExceptionLoggingReader":


Here's the nested syntax:


I'm a bit torn between these syntaxes, which is why I am showing them together. The nested syntax shows the relationships very easily. Here we can see that the ServiceReader is wrapped in the RetryReader which is wrapped in the ExceptionLoggingReader.

But some of the other parameters are a bit more difficult to follow. If we use the original syntax, it is easier to tell that the "TimeSpan" is the retry delay since we've given that intermediate variable a name. I experimented with mixing the syntaxes, but did not like the results.

Logging Behavior
If we run the application again (without restarting the service), we get the same behavior as above. But now there is a log file in the executable folder: ExceptionLog.txt. For more details on the ExceptionLoggingDecorator, see the original article on that decorator.

Here is the flow:
  • The view model calls the ExceptionLoggingReader.
    • The ExceptionLoggingReader calls the RetryReader.
      • The RetryReader calls the ServiceReader.
        • The ServiceReader throws an exception.
      • The RetryReader retries the call. 
        • The ServiceReader throws an exception (again).
      • The RetryReader retries the call.
        • The ServiceReader throws the exception (again).
      • The RetryReader rethrows the exception.
    • The ExceptionLoggingReader takes the exception and logs it.
    • The ExceptionLoggingReader rethrows the exception.
  • The exception bubbles up through the view model and eventually hits the application's global exception handler (that's where the pop-up comes from).
Here is the log file:


The log only has 1 exception for this process. If we look in the exception log, we see the "RetryReader.<GetPeople>" call. In fact, there are 3 calls in the call stack. This is because our RetryReader uses a recursive call for the retry functionality (see the original article for details).

The result is that when we assemble our objects this way, we get the functionality of *both* the retry decorator *and* the exception logging decorator.

But notice that we only have 1 exception logged. That's probably what we want, but we can change that by stacking things in a different order.

Stacking Order Matters
Something that we need to be aware of is that the order that we stack our decorators is important. Let's flip the order of our decorators. Instead of the ExceptionLoggingReader wrapping the RetryReader, let's have the RetryReader wrap the ExceptionLoggingReader.

Here's the code:


And the nested syntax:


The application behaves differently now.
  • The view model calls the RetryReader.
    • The RetryReader calls the ExceptionLoggingReader.
      • The Exception LoggingReader calls the ServiceReader.
        • The ServiceReader throws an exception.
      • The ExceptionLoggingReader logs the exception and rethrows it.
    • The RetryReader retries the call to the ExceptionLoggingReader. 
      • The ExceptionLoggingReader calls the ServiceReader.
        • The ServiceReader throws an exception (again).
      • The ExceptionLoggingReader logs the exception and rethrows it.
    • The RetryReader tries the call to the ExceptionLoggingReader.
      • The ExceptionLoggingReader calls the ServiceReader.
        • The ServiceReader throws an exception (again).
      • The ExceptionLoggingReader logs the exception and rethrows it.
    • The RetryReader rethrows the exception.
  • The exception bubbles up through the view model and eventually hits the application's global exception handler.
We can see the difference by looking at the ExceptionLog.txt file:


Here we can see the first exception logged. Then 3 seconds later (approximately), the second exception is logged. Further down in the file, the third exception is logged.

So we do need to be aware of the order we use when we stack decorators.

Stacking All of the Decorators
We can also stack all of the decorators. The final step will add a client-side cache to the application. For details, see the original article on the caching decorator. This is shown in the final App.xaml.cs file in the GitHub project:


And the nested syntax:


This takes the ServiceReader, wraps it in a RetryReader, wraps that in an ExceptionLoggingReader, and wraps that in a CachingReader. The CachingReader is given to the PeopleReaderViewModel. This gives us all 3 pieces of functionality. (For details on caching, see the original article on the caching decorator.)

Decorators and Transparent Functionality
The view model only cares that it gets an "IPersonReader". The view model itself does not need to know anything about the decorators or if they wrap other decorators. All the view model cares about is that there is a "GetPeople" method that returns data; the details don't matter. That's the magic of using the decorator pattern with dependency injection.

Decorators and Unit Testing
Each decorator has a single function. This makes them easy to unit test. In our tests (retry tests, exception logging tests, and caching tests) we are able to focus on one function at a time. So our tests can be straightforward and clear.

For this project, we can also add integration tests to see how the decorators behave together in different combinations (and that's something I'll be adding in the future).

Wrap Up
Dependency Injection and the Decorator Pattern are a powerful combination. We can mix-and-match pieces of functionality depending on our specific needs. Each piece of functionality is isolated so that tests can be focused. And we can get these benefits without modifying our existing classes. We just snap the pieces together in a different order.

Coming up, we'll look at some other aspects of this project, including how .NET Standard projects interact with .NET Framework projects. We'll also look at using dependency injection containers to compose our objects and manage the lifetime. And we'll look at a more general-purpose interface that allows us to use the decorators with a variety of underlying objects.

Happy Coding!