Archive for December, 2011

Knockout.js Observable Extensions

This started out as a post about how to implement the new extender feature in Knockout.js 2.0. I wanted to see how well that would improve the experience of a money observable I created several months back. Once I had it implemented though, I was a bit disappointed. My extender doesn't have any arguments, but the knockout observable extend call only accepts a hash in the form of {extenderName:extenderOptions}. I ended up with a call that looked like this: var cash=ko.observable(5.23).extend({money:null});

That didn't leave a very good taste in my mouth. So, I pulled down knockout and set out to change the way the extenders were implemented. I've grown fond of how jQuery chaining worked, so why not bring that to Knockout's observables? Luckily Ryan Niemeyer was there to save me from myself and pointed out that I could just extend ko.subscribable.fn to achieve the desired effect.

I'm happy with the outcome. Let's explore the strategy a bit. Before I get in too deep, here's the end result:


Click here for full jsFiddle

You may be asking yourself, "What's so great about this?" This is basically the same as my previous sample with one exception. This implementation attaches directly to the subscribable type that KO provides. You might not have seen this unless you've spent some time digging around the knockout.js source. This type serves as a base for observables, obervableArrays and dependentObservables computed observables.

Here's the code that provides the money formatting:

(function(){
    var format = function(value) {
        toks = value.toFixed(2).replace('-', '').split('.');
        var display = '$' + $.map(toks[0].split('').reverse(), function(elm, i) {
            return [(i % 3 === 0 && i > 0 ? ',' : ''), elm];
        }).reverse().join('') + '.' + toks[1];

        return value < 0 ? '(' + display + ')' : display;
    };

    ko.subscribable.fn.money = function() {
        var target = this;

        var writeTarget = function(value) {
            target(parseFloat(value.replace(/[^0-9.-]/g, '')));
        };

        var result = ko.computed({
            read: function() {
                return target();
            },
            write: writeTarget
        });

        result.formatted = ko.computed({
            read: function() {
                return format(target());
            },
            write: writeTarget
        });

        return result;
    };
})();

Breakdown
Line 11 is where we start. By extending the subscribable.fn object we are adding a property to each and every subscriabable object that KO creates for us. This will give us the ability to chain observables to one another as long as we return an observable from our method(line 32).

On line 12 we see that 'this' references the observable we're extending. I like this because there are no special method signatures we need to implement. Here I'm just grabbing my own reference of this as a variable named target.

Line 18 is where this starts to get a little interesting. I'm creating a writable computed observable that will return the value from the base observable when read. When it gets written to, it will sanitize the input and then write that to the base observable. This will be the observable we return for public consumption(line 32).

Line 25 is where the formatting comes into play. To the observable we're returning we'll add another observable as a property named 'formatted'. This is what we'll bind to whenever we want to see a pretty version of our value. This is another read/write computed observable like we did above. When the property is read from, it will pass the base observable's value through a formatter. The write is the same as the base observable.

Use It

var viewModel = {
    Cash: ko.observable(-1234.56).money(),
    Check: ko.observable(2000).money(),
    showJSON: function() {
        alert(ko.toJSON(viewModel));
    }
};

viewModel.Total = ko.computed(function() {
    return this.Cash() + this.Check();
}, viewModel).money();
ko.applyBindings(viewModel);

On lines 2,3, and 11 you can see where I've used the observable extension I created above. The cool thing about this technique is that we don't care what kind of observable we're extending, it just works.

The showJSON function on line 4 is what gets fired when we click the "Show View Model JSON" button on the example above. Click this and you will see that our json serialization is clean. This is because the base observable we return is the unformatted (no dollar signs, commas, or parenthesis) version.

The Payoff

<div class='ui-widget-content'>
    <p>
        <label>How much in Cash?</label>
        <input data-bind="value:Cash.formatted,css:{negative:Cash()<0}" />
    </p>
    <p>
        <label>How much in Checks?</label>
        <input data-bind="value:Check.formatted,css:{negative:Check()<0}" />
    </p>
    <p>
        <label>Total:</label>
        <span data-bind="text:Total.formatted,css:{negative:Total()<0}" />
    </p>
    <p>
        <button data-bind="click:showJSON">Show View Model JSON
    <<p>
</div>

Lines 4 and 8 we've bound the input's value to the formatted version of the extended observable. Line 12 has the text of a span bound to the formatted version of the computed observable.

I've rehashed this example 3 times now, but I'm happiest with this implementation. Extending *.fn.* isn't documented anywhere I saw, but maybe it should be. ;) Maybe I should RTFM, it's clearly documented here. This chaining technique will be familiar to anyone who has used jQuery. What do you think about this technique?

Cross posted from Fresh Brewed Code. If you haven't taken a look over there, please take a moment to see what we've been up to.

Manage Your Dependencies with Rake and NuGet

Earlier I blogged about how to perform some basic build tasks in your .NET project with Rake and Albacore. There was one bit about managing dependencies I left off though because I thought it warranted its own post. For the projects I've been working on lately, we've managed to keep our source repository light and nimble by not checking in binaries for all of the dependencies.

NuGet 1.6 came out this week and this functionality is baked in. You can check out the NuGet way in the documentation. The bummer of this is that you have to enable "Package Restore" for each project in your solution. You also now have multiple packages.config to maintain per project. Yes, you can manage it all though the GUI or the package manager console for your projects, but I want it all in one place. I also like not having to do anything on a per project basis other than standard references.

After several iterations on what Derek Greer started, I've ended up with the solution below. Dependencies are declared in the same packages.config format that nuget uses, so you can take something you've already created and centralize it. We have one build step to refresh our dependencies and it looks like this:

require 'rexml/document'
TOOLS_PATH = File.expand_path("tools")
LIB_PATH = File.expand_path("lib")

FEEDS = [
	#Your internal repo can go here
	"http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=206669"
]

task :dependencies do
	file = File.new("packages.config")
	doc = REXML::Document.new(file)
	doc.elements.each("packages/package") do |elm|
		package=elm.attributes["id"]
		version=elm.attributes["version"]

		packagePath="#{LIB_PATH}/#{package}"
		versionInfo="#{packagePath}/version.info"
		currentVersion=IO.read(versionInfo) if File.exists?(versionInfo)
		packageExists = File.directory?(packagePath)

		if(!(version or packageExists) or currentVersion!= version) then
			feedsArg = FEEDS.map{ |x| "-Source " + x }.join (' ')
			versionArg = "-Version #{version}" if version
			sh "\"#{TOOLS_PATH}/nuget/nuget.exe\" Install #{package} #{versionArg} -o \"#{LIB_PATH}\" #{feedsArg} -ExcludeVersion" do |ok,results|
				File.open(versionInfo,'w'){|f| f.write(version)} if ok
			end
		end
	end
end

There's a little bit of code there, but we're getting some good benefits from this one task.

Control over where our dependencies go.
I'm not a big fan of the packages/ folder that nuget uses by default. You may be able to change this in the GUI somewhere, but I haven't seen it yet. Yes, I'm aware that this is trivial, but I got used to storing my dependencies in lib/ and I'm okay with keeping that. :) Every team has their own conventions they like to follow and it's nice to not have to change those just because you want to adopt a new tool.

No weird version number suffixes on our folders.
The default convention nuget uses is to store packages under a folder named {name}.{version}. That's cool until you need to update your dependency to a new version. When you do, you (or your tooling) will have to update the reference paths in all of your *.csproj files to accomodate the new path. I would prefer to store it in a folder with just the name of the package. Keep in mind, this removes the ability to run multiple versions of the same library for different projects within a solution. This hasn't come up on my projects yet though.

No need to keep tabs on what dependencies our dependency has.
I'm hoping this issue will change one day. As it stands right now (NuGet 1.6), if I have a single entry in my packages.config like so: <package id="NHibernate" version="3.2.0.4000"/> then calling $> nuget.exe install packages.config will not get NHibernate's dependency 'Iesi.Collections'. It turns out though, calling nuget like this: $> nuget.exe install NHibernate -Version 3.2.0.4000 will get that dependency for us, so that's exactly how our rake script does it.

I feel like the ruby syntax reads fairly easy even if you aren't familiar with the language. Still though, I think it would be beneficial to add a little commentary.

Line 5 is where we define our source(s) for nuget packages. At work we're using a file share to cache packages and then falling back to the default source when needed.

Lines 11 and 12 are where we load up the packages.config xml file using the XML parser that ships with a default Ruby install. From my reading, there are better gems to accomplish this faster, but this is a really tiny XML file we're dealing with.

Line 13 selects each package node and iterates over it. The next two lines just pick out the id and version attributes into variables. On lines 19 and 20 we read in the version file if it exists and also check if the package directory exists. We use all of that on line 22 to see if we need to restore this package.

If we're all systems go for NuGet launch, then line 23 turns the array of feeds from line 5 into '-Source' arguments for nuget.exe. Line 24 creates a version argument for nuget.exe if we have one. Finally, line 25 shells out to nuget.exe and assembles all of the command line arguments it needs to do the job. When we get our package, we poke(line 26) a version.info file to track the version we've downloaded for future runs.

Wrapping Up
That's it. I almost didn't write this post since NuGet 1.6 supports this scenario out of the box. I still feel like it's worthwhile to have this as part of our rakefile if for no other reason than to manage my packages from a single place. What do you think? Please let me know if you see anywhere I could improve the process.

Cross posted from Fresh Brewed Code. If you haven't taken a look over there, please take a moment to see what we've been up to.

Take Control of Your .NET Builds with Rake and Albacore

If Rake is a gateway drug to Ruby, then Derick Bailey is your dealer. He's created a project named Albacore which makes building your .NET projects stupid easy with Rake. Doing anything in angle brackets for msbuild was painful for me. I write code for a living, so it just makes sense to write code to build my stuff.

Lately I've been doing some work with our builds and TeamCity. A coworker pointed me to Rake and next I discovered Albacore. I just wanted to take a moment to show you how simple it is to set up a build that compiles your code, runs your tests and assembles the output.

require 'albacore'

PRODUCT_NAME = "Autofac.Settings"
BUILD_PATH = File.expand_path("build")
TOOLS_PATH = File.expand_path("tools")
LIB_PATH = File.expand_path("lib")

configuration = ENV['Configuration'] || "Debug"

task :default => :all

task :all => [:clean,:dependencies,:build,:specs,:copy]

task :clean do
	rmtree BUILD_PATH
end

task :dependencies do
	#future post. ;)
end

msbuild :build=>[:dependencies] do |msb|
	msb.properties :configuration => configuration
	msb.targets :Clean, :Build
	msb.verbosity = "minimal"
	msb.solution = "#{PRODUCT_NAME}.sln"
end

mspec :specs => [:build] do |mspec|
	mspec.command = "lib/Machine.Specifications/tools/mspec-clr4.exe"
	mspec.assemblies Dir.glob('specs/**/*Specs.dll')
end

task :copy => [:specs] do
	Dir.glob("src/**/*.csproj") do |proj|
		name=File.basename(proj,".csproj")
		puts "Copying output for #{name}"
		src=File.dirname(proj)
		dest = "#{BUILD_PATH}/#{name}/"
		mkdir_p(dest)
		cp_r("#{src}/bin/#{configuration}/.",dest)
	end
end

:default
So, let's start from the top. Line 10 defines a default task. This is what will get called when you just call rake without any arguments from the command line.

:clean
Line 14 defines a task which just nukes the build output directory. This makes sure we don't accidentally leave artifacts around from a previous build.

:build
Line 22 is my first albacore task. This is the task where I'm compiling my code. Line 23 would be 'Debug' or 'Release' if you're using the default build configurations. The line after is where I tell it to clean the build output and then Build. Point it at a solution file and you're good to go. Easy enough.

:specs
Line 29 is another albacore task to run my Machine.Specifications based tests. Tell it where mspec lives and what assemblies contain your tests. Done.

:copy
Line 34 is a simple file copy task to assemble the build output from src/ and copy them to the build folder. Find all of the project files and go to bin/{config} and get the output files. Move them to a folder with the name of the project.

That's about it. Thanks to Derek Greer for getting me started with Rake. I was able to look at his sample Rakefile and start hacking away. Within a few minutes I had my own rakefile running with albacore tasks. Ruby is pretty straightforward and fun. Playing with Ruby via Rake just makes me want to write more Ruby.

Since I'm a Ruby n00b, I'm sure my Ruby is less than perfect. If you have some suggestions for me to make my code suck less, please leave a comment.

Cross posted from Fresh Brewed Code. If you haven't taken a look over there, please take a moment to see what we've been up to.