Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 8739147
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 13, 20262026-06-13T10:52:26+00:00 2026-06-13T10:52:26+00:00

I see people suggests using Messenger/EventAggregator to pass parameter to ViewModel when current target

  • 0

I see people suggests using Messenger/EventAggregator to pass parameter to ViewModel when “current” target is changed, but it doesn’t work on my case.

Say I have a ViewModel class like this:

class CustomerViewModel
{
    CustomerViewModel(int customerId) {}
}

And:

  1. I have views of same type in the application shell at the same time.
  2. For each view, there is a unique CustomerViewModel instance for it. Each CustomerViewModel instance can have different customerId.
    (which is similar to Visual Studio IDE, multiple document opened at
    the same time)

I don’t want to write code like “this.DataContext = new CustomerViewModel(id)” in my View class. What’s the MVVM way to handle such case?

Thanks.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-06-13T10:52:27+00:00Added an answer on June 13, 2026 at 10:52 am

    There are a few ways to handle this case, first – decide if you’re using a View first or View Model first approach.

    Using the EventAggregator is a valid option.

    Another option is to have your ViewModel implement an interface and then use some IoC/DI such as MEF or Unity to get the instance of the ViewModel. Using this method, you can define an Initalize(int Id) function which you know the ViewModel must implement.
    You don’t need your View to know the CustomerViewModel class, only the interface.

    I should note that if you are using some kind of DI, you can always inject that parameter to the ViewModel. IIRC in Unity this can be done a bit easier then in MEF (you simply register the value and then create the ViewModel which depends on that type).

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

i still see people using ftp or telnet for work instead of sftp and
When using auto-registration with castle windsor I see people doing things like _container.Register( AllTypes.Pick().FromAssembly(Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly())
Yes, I agree the title suggests my current line of thinking is defective. BUT
As the title suggests, I would like to see if this is something people
I commonly see people setting $_SESSION variables as $_SESSION['example']=$_REQUEST['something']; $example=$_SESSION['example']; is this redundant? I
I often see people asking XML/XSLT related questions here that root in the inability
Most times I see people try to use linked lists, it seems to me
I always see people mention that Python binding and C Sharp binding etc. when
Sometimes I see people use http://codepad.org as a way to quickly run/test their Perl
Around the web I see people posting things like this: 2012-03-12 10:26:32.495 squirrels[330:707] cocos2d:

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.