Now that the ASP.NET MVC API has settled down I decided to bring some of my ideas about REST and resource-oriented programming to it.

The following screencast shows my current prototype in action:
http://www.aboutcode.net/screencasts/snooze-aspnet-mvc.wmv

I'm keen for comments and feedback.

The source code is currently available via SVN here:
http://svn2.assembla.com/svn/snooze/branches/aspnet

There are currently two approaches when using L2S. Either adding attributes to classes to denote columns, or creating an external XML mapping definition. Neither of these is great. Attributes mix non domain concerns, namely database schema, into domain objects. XML mapping needs to be kept in sync with the classes it describes. During the early stages of a new project, the structure of classes can vary and morph over time. So manual mapping is annoying.

My suggestion is to create a "convention-based" mapping. Where you can define POCOs and then have reflection to build the mapping, based on some simple naming conventions. This mapping can then be used by a DataContext and a database created from it. (Note that I am only considering green field developments, where we are working "code-first".)

The conventions I have thought about so far include:

• A property named "Id" will be the primary key.
• If Id is an int then make it auto incrementing.
• All primitive, string and DateTime properties are columns.
• All properties having the type of another entity in the DataContext are associations.
• All properties of type EntityRef<T> are associations.
• There must be a foreign key Id property defined for associations.
• Any property with subtype a of IList<T> is an association.

One-to-many associations need to be a bit smart with their names. Consider:

class Customer {
  public Employee ReferringEmployee { get; set; }
}
class Employee {
  public List<Customer> ReferredCustomers { get; set; }
}

The mapping needs to understand the "ing" and "ed" relation. Also, we'll perhaps need support for TechSupportEmployee <--> TechSupportedCustomers.

The conventions should follow the usual rules of English grammar. I hope, therefore, that they do not interfere with the universal language discovered by domain driven design.

As a project begins to settle down, there will be requirements that the convention mapping doesn't support. Rather than having to switch to full manual XML mapping, perhaps an augmentation layer could applied. This could describe specific cases of the mapping that are different. For example, a certain primary key column using GUIDs instead of integers.

I have started using Ninject a dependency injection framework for .NET. I find it very easy to use and recommend that people take a look.

Something in particular that I found useful is the ability to bind open generic types.

class Program
{
    static void Main(string[] args)
    {
        var k = new StandardKernel(new MyModule());

        var di = k.Get<Data<int>>();
        di.Content = 14;
        Console.WriteLine(di.Content);

        var ds = k.Get<Data<string>>();
        ds.Content = "hello";
        Console.WriteLine(ds.Content);
    }
}

class MyModule : StandardModule
{
    public override void Load()
    {
        Bind(typeof(IData<>)).To(typeof(Data<>));
    }
}

class Data<T> : IData<T>
{
    public T Content { get; set; }
}

interface IData<T>
{
    T Content { get; set; }
}

Very cool!

I have released an initial version of Snooze. http://www.assembla.com/wiki/show/snooze

Snooze is an REST framework for ASP.NET. It puts the emphasis back on the "R" of URI. The Resource concept is a first-class citizen.

In Snooze you create a resource class that defines the URI template and HTTP methods it supports.

[HttpResource("customer/{CustomerId}")] // Defines the URI template for this resource
public class CustomerResource : HttpResource // A useful base class that implements IHttpResource
{
    // URI template variables are mapped to properties
    public int CustomerId { get; set; }

    // Handles the HTTP GET method
    public override void Get()
    {
        RenderView("Customer", Data.Customers[CustomerId]);
    }

    public override void Put()
    {
        // Read data sent in Request body and update the customer...
    }

    public override void Delete()
    {
        // Delete the customer...
    }

    // HTTP POST can also be provided if it makes sense for the resource.
}

This will mean a URI like "http://yourserver.com/customer/42" will invoke the Get method of an instance where CustomerId equals 42.

What about creating a new Customer?

Well you don't have an ID for the new customer since that is probably created in the database. Therefore you don't know what the URI will be yet. The correct solution here is to POST the new customer data to a CustomerList resource, with URI "/customers".

Alternative GET Views

You can create extra GET methods:

[HttpGetView("edit")]
public void GetEdit()
{
    RenderView("CustomerEdit", Data.Customers[CustomerId]);
}

This results in URIs like "/customer/42?edit"

File Extensions

To support different file formats, such as XML and JSON use:

This will be mapped to by URIs like /customer/42.xml

Sub-Resources

Resources can be naturally nested. For example, a Customer may have Orders.

[HttpSubResource(typeof(CustomerResource), "order/{OrderId}", true)]
public class OrderResource : HttpSubResource<CustomerResource>
{
    public int OrderId { get; set; }
    // ...
}

In this sub-resource, you can have access the parent CustomerResource, using the strongly-typed, ParentResource property.

URIs for this sub-resource will look like: "/customer/42/order/123"

The "true" argument in the attribute, specifies that parent query string parameters are added to this sub-resource URI as well. So a parent with URI template "customer/{CustomerId}?foo={Foo}" will yield sub-resource URI template "/customer/{CustomerId}/order/{OrderId}?foo={Foo}".

Nullable Resource Properties

Imagine a blog posts resource. Its URI could be /posts/{Year}/{Month}/{Day} to get all the posts on a given date. Now what if you want to naturally get the posts for a whole month, year, or ever?

By declaring the properties as nullable, e.g. "int?" in C#, Snooze will also map the "reduced" URIs to your class. You can then test the properties for "null" and return data accordingly.

Reusing Resource URIs

When rendering an HTML view it is likely you will need to link to other resources. Instead of manually typing the URI string, you can call the Uri property available on HttpResource.

new CustomerResource { CustomerId = 42 } .Uri

Resource Areas

Snooze supports resource "areas". These let you map all the resources of a given assembly into a given sub-path. If, for example, a third-party blogging package was built using Snooze you could include it as follows:

web.config:

<configuration>
  <restAreas>
    <area path="" assembly="MyWebsiteAssembly"/>
    <area path="blog" assembly="SomeCompany.BlogEngine, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null"/>
  </restAreas>

So the blog resource URIs would look something like: http://mysite.com/blog/posts/2007/01

HTML Form Support

HTML forms only support GET and POST. To overcome this limitation you can include: <input type="hidden" name="__method" value="DELETE" /> to override the name of the HTTP method used by Snooze.

Feedback

This project came mostly out of curiosity! I wanted to see if REST could be done better under ASP.NET. The code is still very new (less than two days!) It is open source (BSD license) and available via SubVersion. A quick sample project is also provided.

Let me know what you think. Everything is open to changes. Join the assembla project if you would like to contribute your help.

I've made a custom Visual Studio tool that uses a C# parser
(http://www.codeplex.com/csparser/) to convert C# code into an XML
representation. So far only the declaration stuff, classes, method
signatures etc.
I then have a XSLT template engine that takes the XML and a template
file to generate content.
Templates look like:
<% for-each /namespace/class[attribute/@type='ServerModel'] %>
public class <%@name%>
{
}
<%/for-each%>
Easy stuff if you are happy with XSLT.
Currently I use it to generate proxies to classes in my Mobile MVP
library. There are lots of uses I imagine.
Are there any other similar tools out there? If not what are the
prefered places to release this? I took a look at CodePlex but the
TFS source control made me shudder. I'm much more at home with SVN...

My latest screencast is online: Mobile Model in MVP web app

This screencast continues from the work I demonstrated in a previous screencast: http://channel9.msdn.com/Showpost.aspx?postid=344711
When implemented a Model-View-Presenter pattern client-side in JavaScript there is a need to get data from the server. Rather than make this divide explicit with HTTP request, etc, I have used the idea of a model object that moves between the client and server.
So the programmer simply writes the client and server pieces of functionality and lets my framework do the plumbing.
I use code generation and Script# to make writing a client-side web app much more seemless than the usual javascript/XML/JSON/web service madness.
I'm developing the ideas shown here in a project at the moment. If there is sufficient interest I may extract a framework to give to the community.
How do people feel about this approach to web development? What kinds of additions/modifications should be made?
p.s. I have a bit of a cold at the moment, so sorry for the croaky voice in the recording!

Has anyone looked into an extension method on the .NET 3.5 Expression class that returns a JavaScript method? This could then be sent to the client web browser.

So you could then write validation logic in C# and run it in the browser as JavaScript!

Check out my latest screencast over at Channel 9. It demonstrates how to implement a model-view-presenter architecture that runs client-side in a web browser. I am using Script# to compile a C# project into JavaScript.

Imagine we have a set of complex expressions. A subset of these need to be evaluated at runtime, depending on some state external to the program (e.g. user input). If these subsets are not distinct from each other then the code will likely become messy and unstructured.

What we would like to so is define all the expressions first and then pick and choose those required. This would of course involve evaluating all of the them. This wasteful of time if only a few are required.

Enter lazy evaluation! From my rather limited exposure to Haskell, I hear that lazy evaluation is all the rage. :)

Using lambdas in C# 3.0 we can create code like this:

long x = 42;
var lx = Lazy.Eval(() => x * x * x * x * x * x);
if (some_boolean_expression)
{
  UseNumber(lx);
}

where UseNumber is some function that takes a "long" as input.

Now this example is over-simplified, but it shows the mechanics. We use a call to Lazy.Eval to return a wrapper around the lambda. So at that point we have not calculated the expensive expression. Later in the program the variable "lx" is used. lx is of type Lazy<long> and there exists an implicit cast from Lazy<long> to long. At this point the original expression is evaluated and saved by the lazy wrapper. So next time the value is required the cached value is returned.

Here is the Lazy<T> class:

public class Lazy<T>
{      
    bool _gotValue;
    T _value;
    Func<T> _expr;

    public Lazy(Func<T> expr)
    {
        _expr = expr;
    }

    public T Value
    {
        get
        {
            if (!_gotValue)
            {
                _value = _expr();
                _gotValue = true;
            }
            return _value;
        }
    }

    public static implicit operator T(Lazy<T> l)
    {
        return l.Value;
    }
}

And to allow the C# 3.0 compiler to infer types for us, we use a separate Lazy class:

public class Lazy
{
    public static Lazy<T> Eval<T>(Func<T> expr)
    {
        return new Lazy<T>(expr);
    }
}

Whilst lazy evaluation may not be useful in everyday programming, this example does show some of what can be achieved with lambdas in C# 3.0.

Have you seen Script#? It is very impressive cross-compiler from C# to JavaScript. The libraries make it simple to program against the HTML DOM and Silverlight among other technologies. I have been using them recently to program Silverlight 1.0 without having to actually touch JavaScript. Using high-level OOP concepts makes creating complex user interactions much easier.

The Model-View-Presenter pattern has been very popular on the server-side when creating HTML applications. However, it seems that not many people have considered using it within the browser. With AJAX techniques becoming the way to make interactive web applications, it seems a little odd that people are not using more high-level concepts client-side. Of course, this mostly applies to the .NET space. I am aware there are Java toolkits that generate JavaScript.

I am therefore going to look into using Script# to implement a client-side, MVP-style, web application. The Model will contain local data and communicate with the server (via XML HTTP requests). The View will be a simple object that can get and set values from HTML/Silverlight elements and raise events when the user clicks on buttons, etc. The Presenter object will then orchestrate the user interaction logic. All this will be done within JavaScript by using Script# to convert C# classes, etc, into JavaScript concepts.

By writing all the code C#, it should be possible to tier split the Model class into server-side and client-side pieces. Whilst the JavaScript on the client-side is drastically different from the C# server-side model, they will share a common set of data fields. So it should be possible to serialize between the two worlds.

When writing assertions it is annoying to write a string that basically mirrors what the code your testing says. For example:

Debug.Assert(input != null, "input != null");

Similar statements appear when unit testing with tools like NUnit.

With Linq it is now possible to avoid this by using expression trees. The basic idea is to take a boolean assertion function as an expression tree so that we can call ToString() to get the message for the assert.

void Assert<T>(T obj, Expression<Func<T, bool>> test)
{
  System.Diagnostics.Debug.Assert(test.Compile().Invoke(obj), test.ToString());
}

This is then called like:

Assert(input, i => i != null);

Given this idea, we can play with the syntax a bit. Using an extension method:

static class Exts
{
    public static void MustSatisfy<T>(this T obj, Expression<Func<T, bool>> test)
    {
        Debug.Assert(test.Compile().Invoke(obj), test.ToString());
    }
}

We then have:

input.MustSatisfy(i => i != null)

Another syntax option would be something like:

Assert.That(foo).Satisfies(
  i => i > 0,
  i => i < 100);

Where we are now passing an array of assertions (using a params arg in the Satisfies method).

I have so far managed to avoid needing to use any fancy ORM tools. However, this doesn't mean I like writing all the standard ADO.NET code by hand. Using C# 2.0 anonymous methods I am able to write code like the following. (I'm not sure all of this is truly original work; if you have already done this then sweet! I just want to share the ideas with everyone.)

Customer c = With.Database<Customer>(delegate(Database db)
{
    return db.ExecuteReader<Customer>(
        "select Id, FirstName, Surname from Customer where Id = @id", // The SQL to execute
        delegate(IDbCommand cmd) // This anonymous function is called before executing so we can add params.
        {
            db.AddParameter(cmd, "@id", DbType.Int32, id);
        },
        delegate(IDataReader reader) // The IDataReader returned from ExecuteReader is passed here.
        {
            if (reader.Read())
                return new Customer(
                    reader.GetInt32(0),
                    reader.GetString(1),
                    reader.GetString(2));
            else
                return null;
        });
});

My Database class manages the creation of a connection and optionally a transaction. It then exposes methods to invoke SQL commands (Reader, Scalar and NonQuery). A transaction can be automatically provided by calling With.DatabaseInTransaction( ... ) instead. This then wraps the inputted action in a try-catch-finally block, commit and rolling back in the usual places.

("With" is a static class that provides convenient access to the Database object)

public static T DatabaseInTransaction<T>(Function<Database, T> function)
{
    using (Database db = new Database())
    {
        db.BeginTransaction();
        try
        {
            T result = function(db);
            db.CommitTransaction();
            return result;
        }
        catch
        {
            db.RollbackTransaction();
            throw;
        }
    }
}

There are generic and non-generic versions of the functions, depending on if we want to return a value.

For example, here is the non-generic ExecuteReader method from Database:

public void ExecuteReader(string sql, Action<IDbCommand> addParameters, Action<IDataReader> action)
{
    Debug.Assert(sql != null, "sql cannot be null.");
    Debug.Assert(action != null, "action cannot be null.");

    using (IDbCommand cmd = CreateCommand(sql))
    {
        if (addParameters != null)
        {
            addParameters(cmd);
        }
        using (IDataReader reader = cmd.ExecuteReader())
        {
            action(reader);
        }
    }
}

The IDbCommand is created using the following method. Notice that we also handle assigning the transaction if we're in one.

IDbCommand CreateCommand(string sql)
{
    Debug.Assert(_connection != null && _connection.State == ConnectionState.Open);

    IDbCommand cmd = _connection.CreateCommand();
    cmd.CommandText = sql;
    cmd.CommandType = CommandType.Text;
    if (_transaction != null)
    {
        cmd.Transaction = _transaction;
    }
    return cmd;
}

The Database class implements IDisposable, thus allowing the "using" syntax in the With class methods. In Dispose() I close the connection, if the transaction is still open I rollback first.

I anyone wants the full Database and With classes drop me a line. I'm looking forward to C# 3.0 since the improved type inference and lambda syntax will slim down the amount of keyboard time even more!

I recorded a screencast explaining my tier splitting tool for C#. It uses a Model-View-Presenter style application to demonstrate the features of the tool.

Check out the video (wmv format, 14.8 MB)

I'd love to get some feedback from people...

When developing a Model for an MVP architecture it needs at some point to access the database to read and write data. When this model is running on the client-side (in Silverlight for example) it has no access to the database. I suppose the standard solution here is to put the data access code in a separate class running on the server. The client then invokes this service passing the data required.

The approach obviously works, but I don't like it. The Model contains all the data relevant to the business problem. It has the validation logic for the data. Why do I need to suddenly create an entirely different service just to read and write to the database? Now with LINQ there are no code-level ties to a particular database technology.

The Model should be in charge of telling the database what data it needs, reading the data and storing into its fields. When saving data the Model should tell the database what query to execute to save the data.

The root of the problem here is that the Model needs to be split between the client and server sides. However, I want this to be done in such a way that the developer is not wading through plumbing and service layers. In essence, I want this:

[DataContract]
public class Model : IModel
{
  [DataMember] public string CustomerName { get; set; }
  [DataMember] public decimal InvoiceAmount { get; set; }
  [RunAtServer]
  public void Load(int id)
  {
    // Access database here. Get data. Save into properties.
  }
}

This needs to generate two Model classes, one for the server (which is basically the same as above) and one for the client that replaces the [RunAtServer] methods with calls to a service object.

I have this working! :) I have used my C# macro tool to take the above code and generate a new file that contains the two Models, a WCF service and client proxy. These classes are surrounded by "#IF SERVER" and "#IF !SERVER". I then have a WCF service project and Client project that both compile the generated file. The conditional preprocessor directives mean each project only gets what it needs.

This is all still prototype-level code, but it does work. I am waiting on Silverlight 1.1 to have better support for WCF, so for now I'm using XBAPs to test. However, there is nothing stopping me using WinForms for the client as well. I see this as being a great way to write rich internet applications. I can focus on modelling the business problem and just decorate any methods that need to be remote with an attribute.

After a late night hacking session, I finally have a working syntactic macro system for C#! It is comprised of a VS custom tool that uses the CSparser. The end result allows me to do this:

using System;
[Macro(AutoClass)]
public interface IModel
{
  string FirstName { get; set; }
  string Surname { get; set; }
  int ID { get; }
  event EventHandler FirstNameChanged;
  event EventHandler SurnameChanged;
}

The CustomTool property of the IModel.cs file is set to "MacroExpander" and the Build action is set to None. This then generates a new file "under" the source file, called for example "IModel.generated.cs". This generated file contains the original interface (minus the bogus attribute) and a new class called "Model" that provides a stanard implementation of IModel. It includes private fields, a constructor, properties, events and event raising methods. The class is partial so you can still create a file called "Model.cs" alongside the interface and implement any methods. In addition, if you enter implementations of the interface properties/events in Model.cs then the generated class will not contain them. So it is easy to generate the 80% of standard members and custom write the others as required.

The sharp-minded out there will note that "AutoClass" is a parameter passed to the Macro attribute. The expansion process is able to load any IMacro implementation I care to write. The macro implementation is handed the parsed source tree and allowed to modify it as required. After all macros have expanded, the source tree is converted back to CS source text and outputted from the VS custom tool. This generated file is compiled by VS as usual.

I'm going to start using this AutoClass macro to generate most of my Model code (in the Model-View-Presenter architecture). Anywhere else I need code generation at this level I can create more macros easily.

If people are interested in seeing this product released in some way please get in contact. I will perhaps get a screen cast made up to show it in action.