Beginning a WPF/MVVM application: Navigating between views

本文详细介绍了如何使用WPF和MVVM框架来构建具有灵活性的导航功能,通过创建独立的视图模型和使用数据模板来实现不同面板间的交互,确保了视图和视图模型之间的解耦。

Beginning a WPF/MVVM application: Navigating between views

How do you go from one view to another without coupling views or view models together? Here is how I am currently doing it.

The Overall Application Design Layout

The layout we are after is an Outlook style navigation where there is a fixed layout template onto which all the application views will be rendered. It will therefore be possible for developers to create their own views and show them within the application's predetermined layout. The layout splits the views into two sections: The navigation section on the left and the main section on the right. These two sections form one atomic view and we want both to be bound to the same view model. The navigation content on the left allows us to change settings or select items that affect the display in the main content on the right.

Let's go into Expression Blend and create a new project. I'm going to create a simple stock trading application which initially contains just the following:

  • MainWindow.xaml
  • NavigationControl.xaml
  • MainView.xaml
  • PortfolioView.xaml
  • StockQuoteView.xaml
the main view layout
The main view layout

I have created a view that consists of a Grid with three rows and three columns, a status bar, a menu, a grid splitter and my own NavigationControl. I have placed the controls in the appropriate grid row and column positions.
Note the decision to create a separate control for the Navigation aspect of the main view. The behaviour of the navigation is clearly a separate concern to that of the main view and so this should be encapsulated into a separate control. This will enable the navigation behaviour to be easily swapped for a more elaborate, more engaging navigation control later on for example. This also serves to limit the complexity of the main view XAML.

You may be asking yourself why I did not choose to make the menu also a separate control. The simple answer is: No reason at all. In fact it would probably be a better idea to do that, however for the purposes of simplicity I chose not to go down that route because I will be defining each command that the menu is bound to as a separate member of the underlying view model and so there would be nothing much to gain in terms of simplicity or less lines of XAML overall. However if I decided that all the commands would be served up by one IEnumerable<icommand> property on the underlying view model from which I would dynamically create the menu items, then this would be a good reason to isolate that behaviour into a separate DynamicMenuControl for example. Another reason to create a separate control would be if I thought that the menu structure was going to be extensive and therefore it would benefit from having the menu defined in a separate file. The same goes for the status bar and any other control for that matter. Either way, this is still obeying PMVVM and so the rest is just an implementation detail.

Here is the XAML for the main view:

<Grid x:Name="LayoutRoot">
	<Grid.ColumnDefinitions>
		<ColumnDefinition Width="0.2*"/>
		<ColumnDefinition Width="Auto"/>
		<ColumnDefinition Width="0.8*"/>
	</Grid.ColumnDefinitions>
	<Grid.RowDefinitions>
		<RowDefinition Height="Auto"/>
		<RowDefinition/>
		<RowDefinition Height="Auto"/>
	</Grid.RowDefinitions>
	<GridSplitter HorizontalAlignment="Left" Width="5"
            	Grid.Column="1"
                 	Grid.Row="1"/>
	<StatusBar Margin="0"
                  	VerticalAlignment="Top"
                  	Height="23"
                  	Grid.ColumnSpan="3"
                  	Grid.Row="2"/>
	<Menu Margin="0" Height="23" Grid.ColumnSpan="3">
		<MenuItem Header="Views">
			<MenuItem Header="Stock Quotes"
                         	Command="{Binding Path=NavigateToStocksCommand}"/>
			<MenuItem Header="Portfolio"
                         	Command="{Binding Path=NavigateToPortfolioCommand}"/>
		</MenuItem>
	</Menu>
	<local:NavigationControl
	Margin="0,-23,0,0"
	Grid.Row="1"
	DataContext="{Binding}"/>
	<ContentControl Margin="0"
	Content="{Binding Path=CurrentView}"
	d:LayoutOverrides="Width, Height"
	Grid.Row="1"
	Grid.Column="2"/>
</Grid>

The next thing I need to do is set-up the initial window of the application. It is a good idea to have as few windows defined as possible and define their content in separate user controls. Windows are expensive to maintain as they contain repeated code and so a change to one will mean a change to all. For example, say your application goes into test and the testers discover that no parent has been set on any of the pop up windows or that the window style is not correct and there should not be a maximize button. In this case, you would need to find all your pop-ups and change their properties. Inheritance is an option but in this case composition over inheritance allows you to define just one window into which you can dynamically set the content at run time. You could just define a generic style for all your windows which solved this problem but then you have written countless windows and repeated code for nothing! With this in mind, the MainWindow XAML looks like this:

<Window
	xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation"
	xmlns:x="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml"
	x:Class="PMVVM.MainWindow"
	x:Name="Window"
	Title="MainWindow"
	Width="640" Height="480">
	<Grid x:Name="LayoutRoot">
		<ContentControl Content="{Binding}"/>
	</Grid>
</Window>

That’s it ! Ideally this is as much content as I would like to have in the main window.

At this point, the other views don’t contain much more than a text block to illustrate that the view is different from the next. We will come back to the views later.

Lastly the Navigation control needs to provide some means of allowing the user to invoke the relevant commands:

<Grid x:Name="LayoutRoot">
	<Grid.RowDefinitions>
		<RowDefinition Height="Auto"/>
		<RowDefinition/>
		<RowDefinition Height="Auto"/>
		<RowDefinition Height="Auto"/>
	</Grid.RowDefinitions>
	<TextBlock
	Text="{Binding Path=Name}"
	TextWrapping="Wrap"
	d:LayoutOverrides="Height"/>
	<ContentControl
		Content="{Binding Path=CurrentView}" Grid.Row="1"/>
	<Button Grid.Row="2" Height="23"
	Content="Stock Quotes"
	Command="{Binding Path=NavigateToStocksCommand}"/>
	<Button
	Content="Portfolio" Grid.Row="3" Height="23"
	Command="{Binding Path=NavigateToPortfolioCommand}"/>
</Grid>

Now I must temporarily take off my rather dusty designer hat and put on my developer hat. So I will open up the solution I created in Blend in Visual Studio.

Application XAML in visual studio

Now I am about to introduce two very important aspects of PMVVM which, aside from the view models, are critical to its argument. They are: Commands and Dependency Injection. Commands allow us to interact with and communicate between view models in a decoupled way. Dependency injection facilitates this further by allowing us to deal with contracts (interfaces) rather than concrete implementations of our view models. Both these facilities enable the creation of an extremely flexible application.

Now first things first. Let's create the contracts for our view models :

using System.Windows.Input;
namespace PMVVM.ViewModels
{
    public interface IMainViewModel : IViewModelBase{
        object CurrentView { get; }
        ICommand NavigateToStocksCommand { get; }
        ICommand NavigateToPortfolioCommand { get; }
        void NavigateToView(object viewToNavigate);
    }
}

namespace PMVVM.ViewModels
{
    public interface IStockQuotesViewModel :
             IViewModelBase{
        string Name { get; }
    }
}

using System.Collections.Generic;
namespace PMVVM.ViewModels
{
    public interface IPortofolioViewModel :
             IViewModelBase{
        string Name { get; }
        IEnumerable<string> Portfolios { get; }
    }
}

using System.ComponentModel;
namespace PMVVM.ViewModels
{
    public interface IViewModelBase :
             INotifyPropertyChanged{
    }
}

Note the empty IViewModelBase interface. I will be adding some members to that later on. But for now, it will serve as the default implementation of our INotifyPropertyChanged interface.

Let's also look at the implementation of the MainViewModel which is the only implementation we are really interested in at this point:

using System.Windows.Input;
using PMVVM.Commands;
namespace PMVVM.ViewModels.Implementation
{
    public class MainViewModel : ViewModelBase,IMainViewModel{
        private object _currentView;
        public object CurrentView{
            get { return _currentView; }
            private set
            {_currentView = value;
                OnPropertyChanged("CurrentView");
            }
        }
        public ICommand NavigateToStocksCommand{
            get { return new NavigateToViewCommand
		(Container.Container.GetA<IStockQuotesViewModel>()); }
        }
        public ICommand NavigateToPortfolioCommand{
            get { return new NavigateToViewCommand
		(Container.Container.GetA<IPortofolioViewModel>()); }
        }
        public void NavigateToView(object viewToNavigate){
            CurrentView = viewToNavigate;
        }
    }
}

Here I have implemented the behaviour of the NavigateToView method and declared the navigation command properties that the designer was expecting would be present. Obviously we need to invoke NotifyPropertyChanged when the current view is changed.

So why have I created a method to set the current view and not exposed the setter in the interface? At the moment, this appears to be nothing more than a coding style however the behaviour of navigation is unlikely to remain as just a setter of a property and so if we are following best practices, we should not abuse the property setter by including behavioural code other than that associated with changing the state of that member. In our pursuit for clean code, we also want to be explicit in our invocation so that the intent is clear when developers are reading the code.

The commands here are just subclasses of a variation of the RelayCommand that Microsoft endorses in the context of MVVM (online ref #1 Josh Smith on MVVM). For illustration purposes, here it is:

using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
using System.Windows.Input;
namespace PMVVM.Commands
{
    public abstract class WpfCommand : ICommand{
        private readonly string _verb;
        protected WpfCommand(string verb){
            _verb = verb;
        }
        public string Verb{
            get { return _verb; }
        }
        public void Execute(object parameter){
            RunCommand(parameter);
        }
        protected abstract void RunCommand(object parameter);
        protected abstract IEnumerable<string> GetPreconditions(object parameter);
        public bool CanExecute(object parameter){
            return GetPreconditions(parameter).Count() < 1;
        }
        public event EventHandler CanExecuteChanged{
            add { CommandManager.RequerySuggested += value; }
            remove { CommandManager.RequerySuggested -= value; }
        }
    }
}

The verb parameter is not significant at this point but it will prove invaluable later on when we want to dynamically link commands to short-cuts or dynamically control the display text of commands in menu items for example.

Here is the navigation command subclass:

using System.Collections.Generic;
using PMVVM.ViewModels;
namespace PMVVM.Commands
{
    public class NavigateToViewCommand : WpfCommand{
        private readonly object _viewToNavigate;
        public NavigateToViewCommand(object viewToNavigate) : base("Navigate"){
            _viewToNavigate = viewToNavigate;
        }
        protected override void RunCommand(object parameter){
            Container.Container.GetA<IMainViewModel>().NavigateToView(_viewToNavigate);
        }
        protected override IEnumerable<string> GetPreconditions(object parameter){
            yield break;
        }
    }
}

The implementation of the container you see here is not important but you should be familiar with the concepts of dependency injection and inversion of control and perhaps look up the Windsor Container framework. Please refer to the source code for the implementation detail of the container framework I have implemented.

So what happens when we compile and run the solution? When we click the portfolio view button, we see our portfolio view in both left and right panels. The same with the stock quote view. But this is not quite what we want, is it? On the left, we want to have a different view showing some controls the user can interact with and invoke changes that are displayed on the right.

Stock quote view

Stock quote view

So how do we do that? We create another view model with an elaborate system for communicating between the panels, right? Wrong! I mean you can do that if you like but it is not necessary! This is where we leverage the wonders of WPF and data templates. As far as the logical tree is concerned, the view models for both left and right panels are the same and so they should be. Which brings me onto another argument of separating concerns: The navigation control needs to be told that its visual representation of the same view model must be different because it has a different purpose.

In the navigation control, we need to add the following XAML:

<UserControl.Resources>

    <DataTemplate DataType="{x:Type Implementation:StockQuotesViewModel}">
        <PMVVM:StocksQuoteNavigationView/>
    </DataTemplate>

    <DataTemplate DataType="{x:Type Implementation:PortofolioViewModel}">
        <PMVVM:PortfolioNavigationView/>
    </DataTemplate>

</UserControl.Resources>

Here I am overriding the existing data templates for the view models with a different visual representation.

I now have the requirement for two more views that control the navigation aspect of each atomic view. It's OK for me to go ahead and create these, however I will pass them on to the designer to actually implement them:

Portfolio view in expression blend

For illustration purposes, I am only going to change the portfolio navigation view by adding a couple of TextBlocks and a ListBox so the user can select his/her portfolio. I will bind the list box to the list of portfolios on the underlying view model.

<Grid x:Name="LayoutRoot">
	<Grid.RowDefinitions>
		<RowDefinition Height="Auto"/>
		<RowDefinition Height="Auto"/>
		<RowDefinition/>
	</Grid.RowDefinitions>
	<TextBlock
	Text="{Binding Path=Name}" TextWrapping="Wrap"/>
	<ListBox Grid.Row="2"
	ItemsSource="{Binding Path=Portfolios}"/>
	<TextBlock HorizontalAlignment="Left"
	Text="Select a portfolio"
	TextWrapping="Wrap"
	d:LayoutOverrides="Height" Grid.Row="1"/>
</Grid>

So now what happens when I compile and run the application?

Portfolio view in expression blend
内容概要:本文围绕EKF SLAM(扩展卡尔曼滤波同步定位与地图构建)的性能展开多项对比实验研究,重点分析在稀疏与稠密landmark环境下、预测与更新步骤同时进行与非同时进行的情况下的系统性能差异,并进一步探讨EKF SLAM在有色噪声干扰下的鲁棒性表现。实验考虑了不确定性因素的影响,旨在评估不同条件下算法的定位精度与地图构建质量,为实际应用中EKF SLAM的优化提供依据。文档还提及多智能体系统在遭受DoS攻击下的弹性控制研究,但核心内容聚焦于SLAM算法的性能测试与分析。; 适合人群:具备一定机器人学、状态估计或自动驾驶基础知识的科研人员及工程技术人员,尤其是从事SLAM算法研究或应用开发的硕士、博士研究生和相关领域研发人员。; 使用场景及目标:①用于比较EKF SLAM在不同landmark密度下的性能表现;②分析预测与更新机制同步与否对滤波器稳定性与精度的影响;③评估系统在有色噪声等非理想观测条件下的适应能力,提升实际部署中的可靠性。; 阅读建议:建议结合MATLAB仿真代码进行实验复现,重点关注状态协方差传播、观测更新频率与噪声模型设置等关键环节,深入理解EKF SLAM在复杂环境下的行为特性。稀疏 landmark 与稠密 landmark 下 EKF SLAM 性能对比实验,预测更新同时进行与非同时进行对比 EKF SLAM 性能对比实验,EKF SLAM 在有色噪声下性能实验
内容概要:本文围绕“基于主从博弈的售电商多元零售套餐设计与多级市场购电策略”展开,结合Matlab代码实现,提出了一种适用于电力市场化环境下的售电商优化决策模型。该模型采用主从博弈(Stackelberg Game)理论构建售电商与用户之间的互动关系,售电商作为领导者制定电价套餐策略,用户作为跟随者响应电价并调整用电行为。同时,模型综合考虑售电商在多级电力市场(如日前市场、实时市场)中的【顶级EI复现】基于主从博弈的售电商多元零售套餐设计与多级市场购电策略(Matlab代码实现)购电组合优化,兼顾成本最小化与收益最大化,并引入不确定性因素(如负荷波动、可再生能源出力变化)进行鲁棒或随机优化处理。文中提供了完整的Matlab仿真代码,涵盖博弈建模、优化求解(可能结合YALMIP+CPLEX/Gurobi等工具)、结果可视化等环节,具有较强的可复现性和工程应用价值。; 适合人群:具备一定电力系统基础知识、博弈论初步认知和Matlab编程能力的研究生、科研人员及电力市场从业人员,尤其适合从事电力市场运营、需求响应、售电策略研究的相关人员。; 使用场景及目标:① 掌握主从博弈在电力市场中的建模方法;② 学习售电商如何设计差异化零售套餐以引导用户用电行为;③ 实现多级市场购电成本与风险的协同优化;④ 借助Matlab代码快速复现顶级EI期刊论文成果,支撑科研项目或实际系统开发。; 阅读建议:建议读者结合提供的网盘资源下载完整代码与案例数据,按照文档目录顺序逐步学习,重点关注博弈模型的数学表达与Matlab实现逻辑,同时尝试对目标函数或约束条件进行扩展改进,以深化理解并提升科研创新能力。
内容概要:本文介绍了基于粒子群优化算法(PSO)的p-Hub选址优化问基于粒子群优化算法的p-Hub选址优化(Matlab代码实现)题的Matlab代码实现,旨在解决物流与交通网络中枢纽节点的最优选址问题。通过构建数学模型,结合粒子群算法的全局寻优能力,优化枢纽位置及分配策略,提升网络传输效率并降低运营成本。文中详细阐述了算法的设计思路、实现步骤以及关键参数设置,并提供了完整的Matlab仿真代码,便于读者复现和进一步改进。该方法适用于复杂的组合优化问题,尤其在大规模网络选址中展现出良好的收敛性和实用性。; 适合人群:具备一定Matlab编程基础,从事物流优化、智能算法研究或交通运输系统设计的研究生、科研人员及工程技术人员;熟悉优化算法基本原理并对实际应用场景感兴趣的从业者。; 使用场景及目标:①应用于物流中心、航空枢纽、快递分拣中心等p-Hub选址问题;②帮助理解粒子群算法在离散优化问题中的编码与迭代机制;③为复杂网络优化提供可扩展的算法框架,支持进一步融合约束条件或改进算法性能。; 阅读建议:建议读者结合文中提供的Matlab代码逐段调试运行,理解算法流程与模型构建逻辑,重点关注粒子编码方式、适应度函数设计及约束处理策略。可尝试替换数据集或引入其他智能算法进行对比实验,以深化对优化效果和算法差异的理解。
评论
添加红包

请填写红包祝福语或标题

红包个数最小为10个

红包金额最低5元

当前余额3.43前往充值 >
需支付:10.00
成就一亿技术人!
领取后你会自动成为博主和红包主的粉丝 规则
hope_wisdom
发出的红包
实付
使用余额支付
点击重新获取
扫码支付
钱包余额 0

抵扣说明:

1.余额是钱包充值的虚拟货币,按照1:1的比例进行支付金额的抵扣。
2.余额无法直接购买下载,可以购买VIP、付费专栏及课程。

余额充值