First post here, so first things first: Thanks for AutoMapper,
absolutely nice to work with.

I have a scenario where I want to have multiple mapping containers
within the same AppDomain. A small part of the system has its own
mapping scenarios which I don't want to expose to the full
application. I have browsed through the API and I am getting the
feeling that this is not possible.

Something like: var mapper = Mapper.CreateScopedMapper();
mapper.CreateMap<>() ....
mapper.Map<>() ....

Is this possible? Or is it planned?

Thanks in advance for your answer!

Finest regards,
Dennis

Hi!

I think you can do that by creating multiple instances of the MappingEngine
class. I havnt tried it and dont know how much more complexity is involved,
but I think I read somewhere that that is the solution to these kind of
scenarios.

.Ms

You can have multiple instances of the IMappingEngine. This enable you to
have multple mapping configurations within one app domain.

Don't know why you need seperate configurations. Do you have conflicting
mappings? If not then you might as well just pass an IMappingEngine
reference around. (AutoMapper.Mapper.Engine) which is probably a good thing
anyway when you use dependancy injection. Just google on AutoMapper
IMappingEngine and you will get several posts. This makes the design much
more explicit as you have the mapping engine (IMappingEngine) and its
configuration (IConfiguration) where the configuration should be only done
once in an app domain.

By the way.. the key is in the source :-)

https://github.com/AutoMapper/AutoMapper/blob/master/src/AutoMapper/M...

Here you see that the static Mapper class is just a wrapper then Lazy
creates the configuration and engine instances. If you want to create your
own instances then you can do so as you see in the above code reference.

In my version I can do it like

var config = new AutoMapper.Configuration((AutoMapper.ITypeMapFactory)new
AutoMapper.TypeMapFactory(),
AutoMapper.Mappers.MapperRegistry.AllMappers());
var engine = new AutoMapper.MappingEngine(config);

Hope this helps.

There's Nuget package as well.

--
Svetoslav Milenov (Sunny)

Artificial Intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

Look at the ctor of Mapper class, it creates new instance of
MappingEngine, and uses it. It's very simple to use, just inherit from
Mapper<TSource, TDest> and override DefineMap:

public class POSCurrencyDetailDTOToCurrencyMapper :
Mapper<POSCurrencyDetailDTO, POSCurrency>
    {
        public override void DefineMap(IConfiguration configuration)
        {
            base.DefineMap(configuration);
            configuration.CreateMap<POSCurrencyDetailDTO, POSCurrency>()
                .ForMember(d => d.Code, opt => opt.MapFrom(s =>
s.CurrencyCode));
        }
    }

That will isolate your mapping to only this class, and then you can
use it like this:

var myMapper = new POSCurrencyDetailDTOToCurrencyMapper();
var mapped = myMapper.CreateInstance(myDTO);

Added benefit is that Mapper<TSoirce, TDest> implements
IAbstractMapper<TSource, TDest>, so you can use actually the interface
to inject mappers in your code for unit testing, etc.

Cheers
--
Svetoslav Milenov (Sunny)

Artificial Intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

Added benefit is that Mapper<TSoirce, TDest> implements

Hey Ramon,

I had seen the code after sending my initial message to the list (and I
should have checked it before sending mails to the list), thanks for
confirming that this is indeed the -way-to-go- ! ;-).

Thanks,

Dennis

From: automapper-users@googlegroups.com
[mailto:automapper-users@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Ramon Smits
Sent: woensdag 22 februari 2012 10:01
To: automapper-users@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Private AutoMapping container.

By the way.. the key is in the source :-)

https://github.com/AutoMapper/AutoMapper/blob/master/src/AutoMapper/M...
s

Here you see that the static Mapper class is just a wrapper then Lazy
creates the configuration and engine instances. If you want to create your
own instances then you can do so as you see in the above code reference.

In my version I can do it like

            var config = new
AutoMapper.Configuration((AutoMapper.ITypeMapFactory)new
AutoMapper.TypeMapFactory(),
AutoMapper.Mappers.MapperRegistry.AllMappers());

            var engine = new AutoMapper.MappingEngine(config);

Hope this helps.

First post here, so first things first: Thanks for AutoMapper,
absolutely nice to work with.

I have a scenario where I want to have multiple mapping containers
within the same AppDomain. A small part of the system has its own
mapping scenarios which I don't want to expose to the full
application. I have browsed through the API and I am getting the
feeling that this is not possible.

Something like: var mapper = Mapper.CreateScopedMapper();
mapper.CreateMap<>() ....
mapper.Map<>() ....

Is this possible? Or is it planned?

Thanks in advance for your answer!

Finest regards,
Dennis

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"AutoMapper-users" group.
To post to this group, send email to automapper-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
automapper-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
<mailto:automapper-users%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com> .
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/automapper-users?hl=en.

--

Ramon

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"AutoMapper-users" group.
To post to this group, send email to automapper-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
automapper-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/automapper-users?hl=en.

Hey,

Thanks! The reason why I need this configuration is because I don't want the
conversion ability to leak out of the area where I explicitly need it since
this is rather isolated from the other parts of the system, so it might not
always be clear

a conversion was setup in the first place.

Cheers,

Dennis

From: automapper-users@googlegroups.com
[mailto:automapper-users@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Ramon Smits
Sent: woensdag 22 februari 2012 9:33
To: automapper-users@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Private AutoMapping container.

You can have multiple instances of the IMappingEngine. This enable you to
have multple mapping configurations within one app domain.

Don't know why you need seperate configurations. Do you have conflicting
mappings? If not then you might as well just pass an IMappingEngine
reference around. (AutoMapper.Mapper.Engine) which is probably a good thing
anyway when you use dependancy injection. Just google on AutoMapper
IMappingEngine and you will get several posts. This makes the design much
more explicit as you have the mapping engine (IMappingEngine) and its
configuration (IConfiguration) where the configuration should be only done
once in an app domain.

First post here, so first things first: Thanks for AutoMapper,
absolutely nice to work with.

I have a scenario where I want to have multiple mapping containers
within the same AppDomain. A small part of the system has its own
mapping scenarios which I don't want to expose to the full
application. I have browsed through the API and I am getting the
feeling that this is not possible.

Something like: var mapper = Mapper.CreateScopedMapper();
mapper.CreateMap<>() ....
mapper.Map<>() ....

Is this possible? Or is it planned?

Thanks in advance for your answer!

Finest regards,
Dennis

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"AutoMapper-users" group.
To post to this group, send email to automapper-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
automapper-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
<mailto:automapper-users%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com> .
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/automapper-users?hl=en.

--

Ramon

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"AutoMapper-users" group.
To post to this group, send email to automapper-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
automapper-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/automapper-users?hl=en.

Someone had an itch, and scratched it. What more reason do we need? ;-).

From: automapper-users@googlegroups.com
[mailto:automapper-users@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Ramon Smits
Sent: woensdag 22 februari 2012 14:38
To: automapper-users@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Private AutoMapping container.

You can also look at AutoMapperAssist, very nice little wrapper around
AutoMapper, which helps isolate the creation of isolated mapper
classes: https://github.com/darrencauthon/AutoMapperAssist

There's Nuget package as well.

What does this do? I just browsed the code and it seems like a wrapper
around AutoMapper which to me sounds a bit unneeded. The project doesn't
explain why it does that and what problem it tries to fix.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"AutoMapper-users" group.
To post to this group, send email to automapper-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
automapper-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/automapper-users?hl=en.

At the end, as someone else pointed out - someone had an itch, and
scratched it. I found it useful, and I use it when I need it.

Cheers

--
Svetoslav Milenov (Sunny)

Artificial Intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

You can always create instances of the ConfigurationStore and MappingEngine
as needed. It's not as easy as I would like, which is why folks create
wrappers. It's my intention to build AutoMapper 3.0 as a completely
instance-based model-first, and static as just the wrapper.

Thanks

--
Svetoslav Milenov (Sunny)

Artificial Intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

Cool! Have you branched out to a 3.0 devel tree already?

From: automapper-users@googlegroups.com
[mailto:automapper-users@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Jimmy Bogard
Sent: donderdag 23 februari 2012 15:23
To: automapper-users@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Private AutoMapping container.

You can always create instances of the ConfigurationStore and MappingEngine
as needed. It's not as easy as I would like, which is why folks create
wrappers. It's my intention to build AutoMapper 3.0 as a completely
instance-based model-first, and static as just the wrapper.

First post here, so first things first: Thanks for AutoMapper,
absolutely nice to work with.

I have a scenario where I want to have multiple mapping containers
within the same AppDomain. A small part of the system has its own
mapping scenarios which I don't want to expose to the full
application. I have browsed through the API and I am getting the
feeling that this is not possible.

Something like: var mapper = Mapper.CreateScopedMapper();
mapper.CreateMap<>() ....
mapper.Map<>() ....

Is this possible? Or is it planned?

Thanks in advance for your answer!

Finest regards,
Dennis

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"AutoMapper-users" group.
To post to this group, send email to automapper-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
automapper-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
<mailto:automapper-users%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com> .
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/automapper-users?hl=en.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"AutoMapper-users" group.
To post to this group, send email to automapper-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
automapper-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/automapper-users?hl=en.

haaaaa yes, but I'm going to kill the branch and start over. It's just
changed too much.