Skip to main content


Showing posts from 2014

Umbraco Mapper with Nested Archetypes

Following a previous blog post I got a comment asking about dealing with mapping nested Archetypes to a view model using Umbraco Mapper . As I noted in response, it's not that straightforward - the flexibility of the Archetype package means really you have to build something fairly custom for your particular type you are mapping to. Rather than squeeze too much into a comment though, thought the topic worth a post in itself. As before, looking for a simple example, I've modelled a football match but I've changed it a little to use a nested Archetype. There's a top-level type that contains a single field set to which a text field and two nested score types can be added. The score type has fields for the team and the score. From the content editor's perspective it looks like this: I'm looking to map this to a view model that looks like this: public class FootballMatch { public FootballMatch() { Scores = new List

Using Umbraco Mapper with the Umbraco Grid

Like most people in the Umbraco community I've been keen to download and have a play with Umbraco 7.2, released in beta last week. There's a lot of new features, but the shiniest new toy is without doubt the grid. This allows a developer to set up a very flexible interface for the editor to manage their content in a layout that closely reflects what they'll see on the website. When it comes to rendering out the content of the grid, it's very simple. In your view you can just make a call to CurrentPage.GetGridHtml("myGridAlias") and this will spit out the HTML wrapped with bootstrapped elements. You can pass in overrides to use a different template, and create your own. Nothing wrong with this at all but my preferred approach when rendering out Umbraco content is to create strongly typed view models and, via a hijacked route, map the Umbraco content to this model with the help of the Umbraco Mapper package . Once done, this provides a very clean vie

Unit Testing Entity Framework with Effort

Previous posts in this series Rich Domain Models and Entity Framework. A CQRS Implementation with ASP.Net MVC and Entity Framework . Introduction to the series . Introduction In my previous post I discussed steps I've been taking with recent application to move more logic and behaviour into a richer domain model. This has a number of advantages, a significant one being ease of testing of this behaviour. As this is coded as methods on a standalone model class, it's very easy to test due to it's lack of dependencies. Nothing needs to be mocked or stubbed; an instance can just be instantiated in the test method and the appropriate methods called and results asserted. Given the CQRS style approach I've taken elsewhere in the applications, MVC controllers are fairly light and have less value for testing. The main part of the application where logic lies is in the individual query and command handlers. These have a tight dependency on Entity Framework thoug

Rich Domain Models and Entity Framework

Previous posts in this series A CQRS Implementation with ASP.Net MVC and Entity Framework . Introduction to the series . Working with a Rich Domain Model and Entity Framework As described in previous posts in this series, I'm documenting a few changes to the way I've recently been building out ASP.Net MVC applications, following various influencers from blogs and books. One area I was keen to look at was creating a rich domain model - inspired by the Eric Evans classic book and some posts by Julie Lerman and Jimmy Bogard. Previously I would have worked more with what is known as an anaemic domain model - which isn't quite as bad as it sounds... but means that when creating entities for use in Entity Framework Code First, they would in the most part be made of a simple set of properties with public getters and setters. With a rich domain model, we look to push more behaviour into these model classes and provide tighter means of control over their use by callin

A CQRS Implementation with ASP.Net MVC and Entity Framework

Previous posts in this series Introduction to the series . Considering a CQRS approach with ASP.Net MVC Even a quick read of the various blog posts and other web based information on using CQRS with .Net reveals it can mean a lot of things to different people. To my understanding, at scale, it's a recognition that your read and write operations are likely to require quite different approaches. Reads for example may be coming from denormalised or cached information, and writes might go to queues for subsequent processing. Which is all a bit removed from a more basic CRUD approach where we simple read and write to the database. In truth though, I didn't need - at least yet - these type of performance improvements. Nonetheless, there remains value for me even in a smaller-scale application in handling query and command operations more distinctly . Which really means in practice that rather than having a service and/or repository layer that provides methods such as G

CQRS, Rich Domains and Unit Testing with ASP.Net MVC and Entity Framework

Having spent a bit of time working on CMS (Umbraco and EPiServer) based projects, I recently had to come back to building a custom ASP.Net application using the MVC framework. Before commencing I took a bit of time to read around, and re-think some of the ways I've built applications like this previously, in terms of how the solution is architected. Previously I've put together a fairly strict three layered architecture - data access layer using Entity Framework, wrapped in a unit of work/repository pattern; a business logic or service layer, and the presentation web application. Which worked quite nicely in truth, but there's always value in re-looking at such things and seeing how they could be improved. And where's the fun in doing things the same way each time anyway! In particular I was keen to investigate: A CQRS style architecture , where we work with distinct query and command objects, in a more "slices over layers" fashion. This breaks the

Using Umbraco Mapper with Archetype (Part 2)

In the previous post I discussed a method of mapping property values from the Archetype package to a view model using Umbraco Mapper . There was still a remaining issue of how to handle picked content. With the version of Umbraco Mapper 1.4.7 (just updated on our and NuGet) this is now possible with just some changes from the method noted in the previous post. Firstly, you will need to have the Umbraco Core Property Value Converters package installed. If you are using Archetype you'll likely be using this already, but it's needed here to convert the values returned from Archetype node picker properties to either IPublishedContent (for single items from a content picker) or IEnumerable (for multiple items from a multi-node tree picker). Then extending our previous example, let's say we've added fields to our "Football Match" archetype to have a content picker for the match report, and a multi-node tree picker for match reports from previous games.

Using Umbraco Mapper with Archetype

A post came up today on the Umbraco forum discussing use of the Umbraco Mapper package I've built with colleagues at Zone, and everyone's favourite new package, Archetype . We haven't had chance to work with Archetype as yet, but are planning to use it on an upcoming project, so it seemed a good idea to work out the best way for these two packages to play together. It's a little tricky to begin with as Umbraco Mapper is primarily about mapping from IPublishedContent - single Umbraco nodes or collections picked from a node picker or pulled together via a node query - to strongly typed view models. However it also supports mapping from a simple dictionary of strings and objects - Dictionary<string, object> - and that, along with the ability to define custom mappings for a particular view model type, means this can be done fairly cleanly. Note: haven't found a clean way to handle picked content yet - e.g. from content picker or multi-node tree picker..

Umbraco, MVC and Strongly Typed View Models

I've recently returned from Codegarden , the annual Umbraco conference in Copenhagen. It was my second time there, and as previously had a great time and learnt a lot about the CMS and the various ways people are using it. There was a definite theme around many of the technical sessions, including the one I was asked to give, around the idea of strongly typed models and best practices and techniques for using them. Initially I was perhaps naively hoping that in these conversations with other developers tackling these issues, we'd might come to a consensus as to the best approach. Not surprisingly that didn't happen, and actually if anything the picture is changing further due to some interesting work on the core that Stephan presented. But that's no bad thing, options are good and it's clear that different developers and teams have different priorities in this area. Having mulled it all over a bit on the way home, seems to me we have (or soon will have) si

Session notes for talk at Umbraco Codegarden 2014

I'm speaking at the Umbraco CodeGarden conference in Copenhagen this coming week, and for anyone interested in any of the background to the topics I discuss, here's a set of links to various resources. Firstly a copy of the slides . Mapping from Umbraco content to custom view models Umbraco Mapper package GitHub page , NuGet download and Our Umbraco package page . Dependency injection Blog post detailing setting up Ninject with Umbraco . Unit testing Blog posts on techniques for testing Umbraco surface controllers via external classes and Umbraco base classes . Blog post on use of MS Fakes and further details from MSDN

Another Look at Unit Testing Umbraco Surface Controllers (Part 2)

With the release of Umbraco 7.3, this has got a whole lot simpler - see my more recent post discussing this topic In the previous post I looked at testing Umbraco surface controllers, using a technique that basically avoided the issue by extracting the non-Umbraco related logic for test into a separate class, and testing that. Another option is to test the controller as is, using the base test classes provided by the Umbraco core team. My starting point for working with these was a blog post by Jorge Lusar where he details much of the process for working with these. He used Umbraco 6.1.5, and I found things had changed a little in 7.1.0 (latest at time of writing), as well as needing some additional work to handle the controller methods I was looking to test. As Jorge notes, the first things is to get the test classes. They aren't currently available as a separate download as far as I'm aware, so instead I've pulled down and built the latest source code, and t

Another Look at Unit Testing Umbraco Surface Controllers (Part 1)

When coming to work with Umbraco as an MVC developer one feature that is immediately familiar and comfortable to work with is surface controllers . Unfortunately, unlike standard MVC controllers, they aren't straightforward to test. In this blog post I'm going to look to start from scratch, uncover the issues and see what options we have to get around this. Failing test attempt Starting with a simple example taken from the Umbraco documentation , this surface controller action very simply handles a form post. The view model: public class CommentViewModel { [Required] public string Name { get; set; } [Required] public string Email { get; set; } [Required] [Display(Name = "Enter a comment")] public string Comment { get; set; } } The view and the form in a partial: @if (TempData["CustomMessage"] != null) { @TempData["CustomMessage"].ToString() } @Html.Partial("_CommentForm", new SurfaceCont

Unit testing Umbraco IPublishedContent with Microsoft Fakes

Update: with more recent versions of Umbraco, there is a way introduced to me by Lars-Erik and documented in his blog post here that allows for testing IPublished content as attempted in this now fairly old post, without the user of MS Fakes. Given the the MS Fakes product still requires the Ultimate version of VS.Net I'd recommend using the technique he describes. I've recently been working on a package for Umbraco called Umbraco Mapper . It's intention is to support development of MVC based Umbraco applications by providing a simple means of mapping Umbraco content to custom view models. You can read more about it on the GitHub page . For a few weeks now I've on and off tackled a problem I've found with unit testing part of the functionality. Umbraco content is represented in the front-end of the application by an interface IPublishedContent . What I'm looking to do is to create an instance of IPublishedContent with some known properties, map it to a

Async and await with external web resources

Async and await are two keywords that have been available in the C# for a while now. And so whilst probably a bit late to the party thought would share how I've used them for a recent feature, in case they are also new to others. They allow you to write async code much more easily than was previously possible, which should allow applications to scale better - particularly when there's a need to call out to slow running processes (e.g. external web services), or really anything that is "IO bound" (like a database call. So for example you could speed up a web request that requires two calls to two long running processes by running them in parallel on different threads and then waiting for both to return. If they both take 1 second your result can return in 1 second instead of 2. But even with just one long running process in the request, it's still useful, as whilst that process is running the thread serving the request is no longer blocked, and can return