Mapping more that two objects into one

[philn5d]

Looking to map two+ objects into one object.

loose example:

class Person
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Age { get; set; }
}
class ClassRoom
{
public int RoomNumber { get; set; }
}

class PersonClassViewModel
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Age { get; set; }
public int RoomNumber { get; set; }
}
.
.
.

var vm = Mapper.Map(person, classRoom);

.
.
.

[jbogard]

You can do this, but configuration validation won't work. It doesn't know that you'll be using 2 things to map into 1. That's pretty much the reason why I never implemented this, you can't test your mappings at that point.

[philn5d]

Thanks for the info. I am doing this in this way:

CreateMap<Things1, Thingamajigger>()
.ForMember(d=>d.Things2Property, s=>s.Ignore());
.
similar for Things2
.
.

Thingamajigger trouble = Mapper.Map(thing1);

trouble = Mapper.Map(thing2, trouble);

I may have juxtaposed the last 2 since I'm not looking at any code or documentation right now. This seems to be working. Is this best practice for this?

Thank you,

Phil Vuollet

---

From: Jimmy Bogardmailto:notifications@github.com
Sent: ‎9/‎22/‎2013 3:59 PM
To: AutoMapper/AutoMappermailto:AutoMapper@noreply.github.com
Cc: philn5dmailto:themadgeneral@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: [AutoMapper] Mapping more that two objects into one (#389)

You can do this, but configuration validation won't work. It doesn't know that you'll be using 2 things to map into 1. That's pretty much the reason why I never implemented this, you can't test your mappings at that point.

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#389 (comment)

[jbogard]

What I usually do is create a composite object on the source side first,
and then map that over. That seems to be easier than trying to mash two
objects together that may not line up. Also, that way I don't have Ignores
around.

On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 9:54 AM, philn5d notifications@github.com wrote:

Thanks for the info. I am doing this in this way:

CreateMap<Things1, Thingamajigger>()
.ForMember(d=>d.Things2Property, s=>s.Ignore());
.
similar for Things2
.
.

Thingamajigger trouble = Mapper.Map(thing1);

trouble = Mapper.Map(thing2, trouble);

I may have juxtaposed the last 2 since I'm not looking at any code or
documentation right now. This seems to be working. Is this best practice
for this?

Thank you,

Phil Vuollet

---

From: Jimmy Bogardmailto:notifications@github.com
Sent: 9/22/2013 3:59 PM
To: AutoMapper/AutoMappermailto:AutoMapper@noreply.github.com
Cc: philn5dmailto:themadgeneral@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: [AutoMapper] Mapping more that two objects into one (#389)

You can do this, but configuration validation won't work. It doesn't know
that you'll be using 2 things to map into 1. That's pretty much the reason
why I never implemented this, you can't test your mappings at that point.

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#389 (comment)

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/389#issuecomment-24925795
.

[philn5d]

This is a little bit of an odd case where we are populating something like a view model (but a flat one) since the consumer does not work well with collections as properties. So we are mapping from 2 source services into one flat view model in an adapter/controller service for the presentation layer.

In the previous example, Thingamajigger is a flattened version of Thing1 and Thing2 that exposes all properties of both in one class.

Phil Vuollet

---

From: Jimmy Bogardmailto:notifications@github.com
Sent: ‎9/‎23/‎2013 10:39 AM
To: AutoMapper/AutoMappermailto:AutoMapper@noreply.github.com
Cc: philn5dmailto:themadgeneral@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: [AutoMapper] Mapping more that two objects into one (#389)

What I usually do is create a composite object on the source side first,
and then map that over. That seems to be easier than trying to mash two
objects together that may not line up. Also, that way I don't have Ignores
around.

On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 9:54 AM, philn5d notifications@github.com wrote:

Thanks for the info. I am doing this in this way:

CreateMap<Things1, Thingamajigger>()
.ForMember(d=>d.Things2Property, s=>s.Ignore());
.
similar for Things2
.
.

Thingamajigger trouble = Mapper.Map(thing1);

trouble = Mapper.Map(thing2, trouble);

I may have juxtaposed the last 2 since I'm not looking at any code or
documentation right now. This seems to be working. Is this best practice
for this?

Thank you,

Phil Vuollet

---

From: Jimmy Bogardmailto:notifications@github.com
Sent: 9/22/2013 3:59 PM
To: AutoMapper/AutoMappermailto:AutoMapper@noreply.github.com
Cc: philn5dmailto:themadgeneral@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: [AutoMapper] Mapping more that two objects into one (#389)

You can do this, but configuration validation won't work. It doesn't know
that you'll be using 2 things to map into 1. That's pretty much the reason
why I never implemented this, you can't test your mappings at that point.

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#389 (comment)

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/389#issuecomment-24925795
.

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#389 (comment)

[lock]

This thread has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.