I'd want to achieve something like that:
public IActionResult Test(string id)
{
(...)
var user = context.Users.First(x => x.Id.ToString() == id);
var message = "abc";
return View("Edit", user, message);
}
Is that possible without creating ViewModel?
I completely agree with the advice around using view models where possible. They are much easier to work with, even if they can seem overkill at times.
That said, to answer your question, you could use a Tuple for this:
public IActionResult Test(string id)
{
var user = context.Users.First(x => x.Id.ToString() == id);
var message = "abc";
// The generic types will be inferred here so they're not necessary
// but I've added them for clarity in the example.
var viewModel = Tuple.Create<User, string>(user, message);
return View("Edit", viewModel);
}
Then in the view, you'll need this:
@model Tuple<User, string>
Just make sure to add the correct namespace to the User type in the view.
For completeness, here's an example of using a ValueTuple from C# 7, following Adam's comment below:
public IActionResult Test(string id)
{
var user = context.Users.First(x => x.Id.ToString() == id);
var message = "abc";
return View("Edit", (user, message));
}
If you're using .NET Core 2.1 and above, the view's model directive becomes:
@model (User user, string message)
You'd then access those like so:
@Model.user
Otherwise, you'll need to use (credit to @AdamSimon from the comments):
@model ValueTuple<User, string>
var (user, message) = Model;
See the What's New in C# 7.0 blog post on MSDN for more information.
@model (User user, string message) won't work. Razor crashed for me. However, @model ValueTuple<User, string> is ok, then e.g. you can decompose the tuple like this: var (user, message) = Model;
ValueTuple used to require a NuGet and a using in previous versions of .NET Core. If you have the NuGet and add the using to _ViewImports.cshtml, it might work in ASP.NET Core 2.0, as well.You can use the ViewBag but be aware that its contents are not strongly typed.
Controller
public IActionResult Test(string id)
{
(...)
ViewBag.User = context.Users.First(x => x.Id.ToString() == id);
ViewBag.Message = "abc";
return View("Edit");
}
View
@{
User user = ViewBag.User as User;
string message = ViewBag.Message as string;
}
Try using anonymous objects:
public IActionResult Test(string id)
{
(...)
var user = context.Users.First(x => x.Id.ToString() == id);
var message = "abc";
return View("Edit", new {User = user, Message = message});
}
When adding one additional string field, you can use ViewBag.
public IActionResult Test(string id)
{
(...)
var user = context.Users.First(x => x.Id.ToString() == id);
ViewBag.message = "abc";
return View("Edit", user);
}
I agree with others here, if it gets much more complex a viewmodel will save time down the road.
Anonymous objects won't really work as you'd have to use reflection in the view to access its properties.
Your options:
Tuples
return View("Edit", Tuple.Create(user, message));View:
@model Tuple<User, string>
// accessing model data:
@{
var user = Model.Item1;
var message = Model.Item2;
}
Value tuples
return View("Edit", (user, message));View:
@model ValueTuple<User, string>
// accessing model data:
@{
var (user, message) = Model;
}
ViewBag/ViewData
Action:
ViewData["user"] = user; // or: ViewBag.user = user;
ViewData["message"] = message; // or: ViewBag.message = message;
return View("Edit");
View:
// accessing model data:
@{
var user = (User)ViewData["user"]; // or: User user = ViewBag.user;
var message = (string)ViewData["message "]; // or: string message = ViewBag.message ;
}
However, in the end you'll usually realize you're better off creating a separate viewmodel class. ;)
ViewBag