Question

I m从事一项工作。 MUVC站点,使用<0> 和<0>。我在设计上取得了良好进展,并在设计上取得了良好进展(我认为这是我的第一份报告,是真实的D)。但是,我开始看到一些我不满意的东西。

我的问题很可能与我缺乏自治和民主与发展的经验有关,因此,某些人可能比较容易回答,并向我指出了正确的方向。我也非常有机会处理这一完全错误,但我的方向是根据我在这里所读的,有些是从搜寻,有些是从问我自己的问题。但是,我也开始认识到,我看到的一些“子宫”相互矛盾。

我的田径模型只是欧洲4组织模版(Aemic)产生的POCOs。这些应用在我的服务层使用,也通过服务层接触我的申请。我没有哪一类DTO,仅是我的流行病领域模型、观察模型和测绘二者的自动地图,每张advice 我获得。假设他们能够被一对一地绘制地图,这是所有罚款和dan。

我面临的问题是,当我不得不将我的领域模式统一为一种观点模式时,或者当我需要某种商业逻辑来界定一种观点模式的财产时。

两个例子:

我有两种模式,即用户和用户档案。这是一种一对一的绘图,因此,这在逻辑上已经很平坦——它只是两个单独的模型。我认为,模型需要用户和用户档案的特性。从我所看到的情况来看,自动地图仪无法轻易做到这一点,因此,我的确扩大了我的用户POCO,为它增加了必要的用户档案特性:

public string UserName
{
    get { return UserProfile.UserName; }
}

我不是这种大狂热,因为它似乎违反了南盟,并且可能成为我必须做的更大痛苦之地。

Encapsulating business/2007/1

我还有一个案例,即用户财产是储存的,而是衍生的,在返还价值之前需要做一些逻辑。例如,URL的形象将取决于是否在Facebook或Twitter上登记。因此,我有这样的想法:

public string ProfileImageUrl
{
    get
    {
        if (User.TwitterId != null)
        {
            // return Twitter profile image URL
        }
        if (User.FacebookId != null)
        {
            // return Facebook profile image URL
        }
    }
}

我确信,这是自治政府负责的一点,但我不敢肯定,如果我想要保持这一流行病,这是否应该以领域模式加以推广。因此,我不能确定属于哪里。

I m not completely stuck on having my domain model be anemic (I know that s its own debate), but I do anticipate this domain model being used by multiple applications with different view models and validation.

Thank in advance.

<><>UPDATE: 针对`jfar',我的主要问题就是,似乎像这一样,应该能够做的是“自动地图”。否则,我就能够坚持这一选择。我只是想有人把我的设计增加一倍,以确保这样做没有更好的办法。

My issue with the encapsulating business logic example, is that I m violating the anemia of my domain model. In some cases, this may even need to hit the repositories to pull certain data for business logic, and this seems like a bad design to me.

The other thing I m starting to wonder, is if I shouldn t have a DTO layer, but I honestly don t want to go that route either (and per the question I linked above, it seems to be more accepted not to use DTOs w/ DDD).

Answer 1

Flattening: You can chain your mappings together using Automapper s ability to map to an existing object. Chain Example
Encapsulatng Business Logic: I don t really see your problem. However, if you want Automapper to be responsible, take a look at before and after maps or custom resolvers. Custom Resolver Example

Answer 2

Why are you so intent on keeping your domain model anemic? It looks to me like your domain objects are nothing more than DTOs.

属于贵国拥有必要信息归还正确URL的领域类别。页: 1 用户Profile。如果单一类别没有所需信息,说明服务情况。你要么在你的工作上制造一种方法,将URL或Darin Dimitrov等复合物体退回。

Firestrand and Darin Dimitrov s answers are both good ways to accomplish flattening.

Answer 3

Define a model that regroups those two models:

public class UserWithProfile
{
    public User User { get; set; }
    public UserProfile Profile { get; set; }
}

之后,你的服务层回去了这一模式。如果用户与用户Profile之间有1--1图谱,则可以确定以下模型:

public class UserWithProfile: User
{
    public UserProfile Profile { get; set; }
}

Then define a view model containing only what is needed by the given view:

public class SomeUserViewModel
{
    ... only properties needed by the given view
}

next define a mapping between your model and your view model:

Mapper.CreateMap<UserWithProfile, SomeUserViewModel>()
      ...

and finally in your controller use the service layer to fetch the model, map it to a view model and pass this view model to the view for rendering, pretty standard stuff.

Answer 4

I searched and read about flattening more, and the more I searched, to more it looked like Automapper should be handling this automagically. After playing around a bit, I found a way to get this to work, though I still can t find any examples of doing this, even with Automapper s documentation.

The key is to name the property on the destination object with the fully qualified name of the source object graph.

Source objects:

class User
{
    int Id { get; set; }
    FacebookUser FacebookUser { get; set; }
}

class FacebookUser
{
    string UserName { get; set; }
}

Destination objects:

class UserViewModel
{
    int Id { get; set; }
    string FacebookUserUserName { get; set; }
}

因此:

UserViewModel.Id -> User.Id
UserViewModel.FacebookUserUserName -> User.FacebookUser.UserName

也许这在我看来是显而易见的,也许对大多数人来说是这样。现在我想到的是,这确实是有意义的——它确实是它能够工作的唯一途径。直到现在,我才看不到。

友情链接