Binding to a single element inside a CompositeCollection

Question

I am trying to produce a list of servers for browsing on a network such that it produces a tree view which looks like this:

-Local Server
 - Endpoint 1
 - En         


        

Answer 1

Finally, just after a few years, my WPF skills are good enough to solve this one ;)

Here's a SingleElement like you outlined in your question. It is implemented by subclassing a CollectionContainer and putting the bound element inside the collection. By registering a change handler we can even update the CollectionContainer when the binding changes. For the original CollectionProperty we specify a coercion handler to prevent users of our class to mess with the collection property, if you would like to improve the protection you could use a custom collection instead of an ObservableCollection. As a bonus I show how to make the SingleElement disappear by using a placeholder value, though technically that would be more of an "OptionalSingleElement".

public class SingleElement : CollectionContainer
{
    public static readonly object EmptyContent = new object();

    public static readonly DependencyProperty ContentProperty = DependencyProperty.Register(
        "Content", typeof(object), typeof(SingleElement), new FrameworkPropertyMetadata(EmptyContent, HandleContentChanged));

    static SingleElement()
    {
        CollectionProperty.OverrideMetadata(typeof(SingleElement), new FrameworkPropertyMetadata { CoerceValueCallback = CoerceCollection });
    }

    private static object CoerceCollection(DependencyObject d, object baseValue)
    {
        return ((SingleElement)d)._content;
    }

    private static void HandleContentChanged(DependencyObject d, DependencyPropertyChangedEventArgs e)
    {
        var content = ((SingleElement)d)._content;

        if (e.OldValue == EmptyContent && e.NewValue != EmptyContent)
            content.Add(e.NewValue);
        else if (e.OldValue != EmptyContent && e.NewValue == EmptyContent)
            content.RemoveAt(0);
        else // (e.OldValue != EmptyContent && e.NewValue != EmptyContent)
            content[0] = e.NewValue;
    }

    private ObservableCollection<object> _content;

    public SingleElement()
    {
        _content = new ObservableCollection<object>();
        CoerceValue(CollectionProperty);
    }

    public object Content
    {
        get { return GetValue(ContentProperty); }
        set { SetValue(ContentProperty, value); }
    }
}

You can use it exactly like you stated it in your question, except that you have to adjust for the lack of a DataContext in the CompositeCollection:

<TreeView x:Name="wTree">
    <TreeView.Resources>
        <CompositeCollection x:Key="Items">
            <local:SingleElement Content="{Binding DataContext.LocalServer, Source={x:Reference wTree}}"/>
            <TreeViewItem Header="Remote">
                <TreeViewItem.ItemsSource>
                    <CompositeCollection>
                        <TreeViewItem Header="&lt;Click to add ...&gt;"/>
                        <CollectionContainer Collection="{Binding DataContext.RemoteServers, Source={x:Reference wTree}}"/>
                    </CompositeCollection>
                </TreeViewItem.ItemsSource>
            </TreeViewItem>
        </CompositeCollection>
    </TreeView.Resources>
    <TreeView.ItemsSource>
        <StaticResource ResourceKey="Items"/>
    </TreeView.ItemsSource>
</TreeView>

Answer 2

I posted a question very similar to yours regarding CompositeCollections: Why is CompositeCollection not Freezable?

This is apparently a bug in WPF, believe it or not. Here's a post by an MS employee admitting as much: http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/wpf/thread/b15cbd9d-95aa-47c6-8068-7ae9f7dca88a

The CompositeCollection is not freezable, but should be. This makes it difficult to combine nonstatic elements into one collection. It's a common scenario for a lot of things. For example, a "Select One" element at the top of a combobox filled with other databound objects would be nice, but you can't do it declaratively.

Anyway, I'm sorry this is not an answer, but hopefully it helps you see why this isn't working how you thought it should.

Answer 3

Well, this is the closest I can come to your requirements. All the functionality is not contained within one TreeView, nor is it bound to a compositecollection, but that can remain a secret between you and me;)

<Window x:Class="CompositeCollectionSpike.Window1"
xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation"
xmlns:x="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml"
Title="Window1" Height="300" Width="300"
xmlns:local="clr-namespace:CompositeCollectionSpike">
<StackPanel>
    <StackPanel.Resources>
        <Style TargetType="TreeView">
            <Setter Property="BorderThickness" Value="0"/>
        </Style>
        <HierarchicalDataTemplate DataType="{x:Type local:Server}"
                                  ItemsSource="{Binding EndPoints}">
            <Label Content="{Binding Name}"/>
        </HierarchicalDataTemplate>
    </StackPanel.Resources>
    <TreeView ItemsSource="{Binding LocalServer}"/>
    <TreeViewItem DataContext="{Binding RemoteServers}"
                  Header="{Binding Description}">
        <StackPanel>
            <Button Click="Button_Click">Add Remote Server</Button>
            <TreeView ItemsSource="{Binding}"/>
        </StackPanel>
    </TreeViewItem>
</StackPanel>

using System.Collections.ObjectModel;
using System.Windows;

namespace CompositeCollectionSpike
{
    public partial class Window1 : Window
    {
        private ViewModel viewModel;
        public Window1()
        {
            InitializeComponent();
            viewModel = new ViewModel
                            {
                                LocalServer =new ServerCollection{new Server()},
                                RemoteServers =
                                    new ServerCollection("Remote Servers") {new Server(),
                                        new Server(), new Server()},
                            };
            DataContext = viewModel;
        }

        private void Button_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
        {
            viewModel.LaunchAddRemoteServerDialog();
        }
    }

    public class ViewModel:DependencyObject
    {
        public ServerCollection LocalServer { get; set; }
        public ServerCollection RemoteServers { get; set; }

        public void LaunchAddRemoteServerDialog()
        {}
    }

    public class ServerCollection:ObservableCollection<Server>
    {
        public ServerCollection(){}

        public ServerCollection(string description)
        {
            Description = description;
        }
        public string Description { get; set; }
    }

    public class Server
    {
        public static int EndpointCounter;
        public static int ServerCounter;
        public Server()
        {
            Name = "Server"+ ++ServerCounter;
            EndPoints=new ObservableCollection<string>();
            for (int i = 0; i < 2; i++)
            {
                EndPoints.Add("Endpoint"+ ++EndpointCounter);
            }
        }
        public string Name { get; set; }
        public ObservableCollection<string> EndPoints { get; set; }
    }
}

Answer 4

Can't you just expose a new collection from your ViewModel that the tree can bind to?

Something like:

public Server LocalServer;
public ObservableCollection<Server> RemoteServers;

public IEnumerable ServerTree { return new[] { LocalServer, RemoteServers } }

After all your ViewModel is a ViewModel. It should be exposing exactly what is needed by the view.