Skip to main content

How to NOT expose a read only collection in C#

These days I had the opportunity to make a review over an ecommerce application. They tried to use CQRS and they almost succeeded. 
I notified a problem on their queries classes that can become a big problem in time, if you want to sell this solution as a platform. Also, from some perspective, these problems also violate the CQRS principle.
Let’s see some code now:
public class Order
{
    Collection<OrderItem> _items;   

    public IEnumerable<OrderItem> Items
    {
        get
        {
            return _items;
        }
    }
    ...
}
What do you see here strange?  We want to expose the OrderItem collection as a read only collection. To do this, we convert it to IEnumerable.
Hmmm… sounds good? Nope. Big mistake! Nobody stop us to convert the Items back to an ICollection and Add/Remove items from it.
Order order = new Order();
…
var orderItems = (Collection<OrderItem>)oder.Items;
What should we do? .NET framework has specials collections that can be used in these situations. I this case we should use IReadOnlyCollection<T>. This class will let the user to access items but he will not be able to modify the list (add or remove items from the collection).
To obtain the list as a read only collection we will need to use the AsReadOnly() method:
public class Order
{
    Collection<OrderItem> _items;   

    public IReadOnlyCollection<OrderItem> Items
    {
        get
        {
            return _items. AsReadOnly();
        }
    }
   
    ...
}
Under the hood, this method will create a new collection that point to our original items.
When expose items as “read-only”, you should always double check. There are many methods that permit us to cast items.

Comments

  1. What about the OrderItems themselves? You can't add or remove, but you can change the existing ones. How do you protect against that? Setting quantity to zero on an OrderItem (OrderLine) it's as if you deleted that item/line from the cart. Even today, to remove an item from your cart on Amazon you have to type zero in the quantity field and click "Update" :).

    ReplyDelete
  2. Encapsulating the internal collection with a ReadOnlyCollection clearly makes the intent more clear, but does not stops a programmer that is determined to break the encapsulation, by doing something like:

    IList orderItems = ((ReadOnlyCollection)(oder.Items)).Items;
    :-)

    ReplyDelete
  3. I thought that modifying the IEnumerable collection while iterating will cause runtime exception, isn't that right?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How to check in AngularJS if a service was register or not

There are cases when you need to check in a service or a controller was register in AngularJS.
For example a valid use case is when you have the same implementation running on multiple application. In this case, you may want to intercept the HTTP provider and add a custom step there. This step don’t needs to run on all the application, only in the one where the service exist and register.
A solution for this case would be to have a flag in the configuration that specify this. In the core you would have an IF that would check the value of this flag.
Another solution is to check if a specific service was register in AngularJS or not. If the service was register that you would execute your own logic.
To check if a service was register or not in AngularJS container you need to call the ‘has’ method of ‘inhector’. It will return TRUE if the service was register.
if ($injector.has('httpInterceptorService')) { $httpProvider.interceptors.push('httpInterceptorService&#…

ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded

Today blog post will be started with the following error when running DB tests on the CI machine:
threw exception: System.InvalidOperationException: The Entity Framework provider type 'System.Data.Entity.SqlServer.SqlProviderServices, EntityFramework.SqlServer' registered in the application config file for the ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded. Make sure that the assembly-qualified name is used and that the assembly is available to the running application. See http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=260882 for more information. at System.Data.Entity.Infrastructure.DependencyResolution.ProviderServicesFactory.GetInstance(String providerTypeName, String providerInvariantName) This error happened only on the Continuous Integration machine. On the devs machines, everything has fine. The classic problem – on my machine it’s working. The CI has the following configuration:

TeamCity.NET 4.51EF 6.0.2VS2013
It seems that there …

Run native .NET application in Docker (.NET Framework 4.6.2)

Scope
The main scope of this post is to see how we can run a legacy application written in .NET Framework in Docker.

Context
First of all, let’s define what is a legacy application in our context. By a legacy application we understand an application that runs .NET Framework 3.5 or higher in a production environment where we don’t have any more the people or documentation that would help us to understand what is happening behind the scene.
In this scenarios, you might want to migrate the current solution from a standard environment to Docker. There are many advantages for such a migration, like:

Continuous DeploymentTestingIsolationSecurity at container levelVersioning ControlEnvironment Standardization
Until now, we didn’t had the possibility to run a .NET application in Docker. With .NET Core, there was support for .NET Core in Docker, but migration from a full .NET framework to .NET Core can be costly and even impossible. Not only because of lack of features, but also because once you…