Search Results

Search found 20224 results on 809 pages for 'inversion of control (ioc)'.

Page 1/809 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Dependency Injection/IoC container practices when writing frameworks

    - by Dave Hillier
    I've used various IoC containers (Castle.Windsor, Autofac, MEF, etc) for .Net in a number of projects. I have found they tend to encourage a number of bad practices. Are there any established practices for IoC container use, particularly when providing a platform/framework? My aim as a framework writer is to make code as simple and as easy to use as possible. I'd rather write one line of code to construct an object than ten or even just two. For example, a couple of code smells that I've noticed and don't have good suggestions to: Large number of parameters (5) for constructors. Creating services tends to be complex; all of the dependencies are injected via the constructor - despite the fact that the components are rarely optional (except for maybe in testing). Lack of private and internal classes; this one may be a specific limitation of using C# and Silverlight, but I'm interested in how it is solved. It's difficult to tell what a frameworks interface is if all the classes are public; it allows me access to private parts that I probably shouldnt touch. Coupling the object lifecycle to the IoC container. It is often difficult to manually construct the dependencies required to create objects. Object lifecycle is too often managed by the IoC framework. I've seen projects where most classes are registered as Singletons. You get a lack of explicit control and are also forced to manage the internals (it relates to the above point, all classes are public and you have to inject them). For example, .Net framework has many static methods. such as, DateTime.UtcNow. Many times I have seen this wrapped and injected as a construction parameter. Depending on concrete implementation makes my code hard to test. Injecting a dependency makes my code hard to use - particularly if the class has many parameters. How do I provide both a testable interface, as well as one that is easy to use? What are the best practices?

    Read the article

  • Explicitly pass context object versus injecting with IoC

    - by SonOfPirate
    I have a layered service application where the service layer delegates operations into the domain layer for execution. Many of these operations need to know the context under which they are operation. (The context included the identity of the current user, culture information, etc. received from the caller.) For example, I have an API method that returns a list of announcements. The list is based on the current user's role and each announcement is localized to their culture. The API is a thin-facade that delegates to an Application Service in my domain layer. The Application Service method obviously needs to know the context of the current request/operation as another call to the same API from another user should result in a different list. Within this method, we also have logging that uses some of the context information so we a clear understanding of the context when the operation was performed (this is especially useful if something goes wrong.) While this is a contrived example, in the real world, my Application Services will coordinate operations with many collaborative components, any number of them also needing the context information. My choice is to pass the context to the Application Service which would then pass it with any calls to collaborators or have the IoC container satisfy the dependency the Application Service and any collaborators have on the context. I am wondering if it is considered good/bad, best practices/code smell, etc. if I pass the context object as a parameter to the domain methods or if injecting the context via an IoC container is preferred. (EDIT: I should mention that the context object is instantiated per-request.)

    Read the article

  • IOC - Should util classes with static helper methods be wired up with IOC?

    - by Greg
    Hi, Just trying to still get my head around IOC principles. Q1: Static Methods - Should util classes with static helper methods be wired up with IOC? For example if I have a HttpUtils class with a number of static methods, should I be trying to pass it to other business logic classes via IOC? Follow on questions for this might be: Q2: Singletons - What about things like logging where you may typically get access to it via a Logger.getInstance() type call. Would you normally leave this as is, and NOT use IOC for injecting the logger into business classes that need it? Q3: Static Classes - I haven't really used this concept, but are there any guidelines for how you'd typically handle this if you were moving to an IOC based approach. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • can I use the IOC when using a 3rd party library

    - by Greg
    Hi, Q1 If I have a reusable library that is available, that uses interfaces with classes that use the getInstance concept to create concrete classes for you to use, then in this case would that make sense on the client side to use the IOC container to create instances of these classes? Or is that really applying a double layer of abstraction? Q2 Or in the cases where I'm building the reusable library myself and want the client to use an IOC container, then in my reusable library would I then dispense with any overhead of having factories or "getInstance" methods to instantiate the classes in the client? (i.e. as the IOC container would do this no?)

    Read the article

  • What is Inversion of control and why we need it?

    - by Jalpesh P. Vadgama
    Most of programmer need inversion of control pattern in today’s complex real time application world. So I have decided to write a blog post about it. This blog post will explain what is Inversion of control and why we need it. We are going to take a real world example so it would be better to understand. The problem- Why we need inversion of control? Before giving definition of Inversion of control let’s take a simple real word example to see why we need inversion of control. Please have look on the following code. public class class1 { private class2 _class2; public class1() { _class2=new class2(); } } public class class2 { //Some implementation of class2 } I have two classes “Class1” and “Class2”.  If you see the code in that I have created a instance of class2 class in the class1 class constructor. So the “class1” class is dependent on “class2”. I think that is the biggest issue in real world scenario as if we change the “class2” class then we might need to change the “class1” class also. Here there is one type of dependency between this two classes that is called Tight Coupling. Tight coupling will have lots of problem in real world applications as things are tends to be change in future so we have to change all the tight couple classes that are dependent of each other. To avoid this kind of issue we need Inversion of control. What is Inversion of Control? According to the wikipedia following is a definition of Inversion of control. “In software engineering, Inversion of Control (IoC) is an object-oriented programming practice where the object coupling is bound at run time by an assembler object and is typically not known at compile time using static analysis.” So if you read the it carefully it says that we should have object coupling at run time not compile time where it know what object it will create, what method it will call or what feature it will going to use for that. We need to use same classes in such way so that it will not tight couple with each other. There are multiple way to implement Inversion of control. You can refer wikipedia link for knowing multiple ways of implementing Inversion of control. In future posts we are going to see all the different way of implementing Inversion of control.

    Read the article

  • Granular Clipboard Control in Oracle IRM

    - by martin.abrahams
    One of the main leak prevention controls that customers are looking for is clipboard control. After all, there is little point in controlling access to a document if authorised users can simply make unprotected copies by use of the cut and paste mechanism. Oddly, for such a fundamental requirement, many solutions only offer very simplistic clipboard control - and require the customer to make an awkward choice between usability and security. In many cases, clipboard control is simply an ON-OFF option. By turning the clipboard OFF, you disable one of the most valuable edit functions known to man. Try working for any length of time without copying and pasting, and you'll soon appreciate how valuable that function is. Worse, some solutions disable the clipboard completely - not just for the protected document but for all of the various applications you have open at the time. Normal service is only resumed when you close the protected document. In this way, policy enforcement bleeds out of the particular assets you need to protect and interferes with the entire user experience. On the other hand, turning the clipboard ON satisfies a fundamental usability requirement - but also makes it really easy for users to create unprotected copies of sensitive information, maliciously or otherwise. All they need to do is paste into another document. If creating unprotected copies is this simple, you have to question how much you are really gaining by applying protection at all. You may not be allowed to edit, forward, or print the protected asset, but all you need to do is create a copy and work with that instead. And that activity would not be tracked in any way. So, a simple ON-OFF control creates a real tension between usability and security. If you are only using IRM on a small scale, perhaps security can outweigh usability - the business can put up with the restriction if it only applies to a handful of important documents. But try extending protection to large numbers of documents and large user communities, and the restriction rapidly becomes really unwelcome. I am aware of one solution that takes a different tack. Rather than disable the clipboard, pasting is always permitted, but protection is automatically applied to any document that you paste into. At first glance, this sounds great - protection travels with the content. However, at any scale this model may not be so appealing once you've had to deal with support calls from users who have accidentally applied protection to documents that really don't need it - which would be all too easily done. This may help control leakage, but it also pollutes the system with documents that have policies applied with no obvious rhyme or reason, and it can seriously inconvenience the business by making non-sensitive documents difficult to access. And what policy applies if you paste some protected content into an already protected document? Which policy applies? There are no prizes for guessing that Oracle IRM takes a rather different approach. The Oracle IRM Approach Oracle IRM offers a spectrum of clipboard controls between the extremes of ON and OFF, and it leverages the classification-based rights model to give granular control that satisfies both security and usability needs. Firstly, we take it for granted that if you have EDIT rights, of course you can use the clipboard within a given document. Why would we force you to retype a piece of content that you want to move from HERE... to HERE...? If the pasted content remains in the same document, it is equally well protected whether it be at the beginning, middle, or end - or all three. So, the first point is that Oracle IRM always enables the clipboard if you have the right to edit the file. Secondly, whether we enable or disable the clipboard, we only affect the protected document. That is, you can continue to use the clipboard in the usual way for unprotected documents and applications regardless of whether the clipboard is enabled or disabled for the protected document(s). And if you have multiple protected documents open, each may have the clipboard enabled or disabled independently, according to whether you have Edit rights for each. So, even for the simplest cases - the ON-OFF cases - Oracle IRM adds value by containing the effect to the protected documents rather than to the whole desktop environment. Now to the granular options between ON and OFF. Thanks to our classification model, we can define rights that enable pasting between documents in the same classification - ie. between documents that are protected by the same policy. So, if you are working on this month's financial report and you want to pull some data from last month's report, you can simply cut and paste between the two documents. The two documents are classified the same way, subject to the same policy, so the content is equally safe in both documents. However, if you try to paste the same data into an unprotected document or a document in a different classification, you can be prevented. Thus, the control balances legitimate user requirements to allow pasting with legitimate information security concerns to keep data protected. We can take this further. You may have the right to paste between related classifications of document. So, the CFO might want to copy some financial data into a board document, where the two documents are sealed to different classifications. The CFO's rights may well allow this, as it is a reasonable thing for a CFO to want to do. But policy might prevent the CFO from copying the same data into a classification that is accessible to external parties. The above option, to copy between classifications, may be for specific classifications or open-ended. That is, your rights might enable you to go from A to B but not to C, or you might be allowed to paste to any classification subject to your EDIT rights. As for so many features of Oracle IRM, our classification-based rights model makes this type of granular control really easy to manage - you simply define that pasting is permitted between classifications A and B, but omit C. Or you might define that pasting is permitted between all classifications, but not to unprotected locations. The classification model enables millions of documents to be controlled by a few such rules. Finally, you MIGHT have the option to paste anywhere - such that unprotected copies may be created. This is rare, but a legitimate configuration for some users, some use cases, and some classifications - but not something that you have to permit simply because the alternative is too restrictive. As always, these rights are defined in user roles - so different users are subject to different clipboard controls as required in different classifications. So, where most solutions offer just two clipboard options - ON-OFF or ON-but-encrypt-everything-you-touch - Oracle IRM offers real granularity that leverages our classification model. Indeed, I believe it is the lack of a classification model that makes such granularity impractical for other IRM solutions, because the matrix of rules for controlling pasting would be impossible to manage - there are so many documents to consider, and more are being created all the time.

    Read the article

  • Getting a Database into Source Control

    - by Grant Fritchey
    For any number of reasons, from simple auditing, to change tracking, to automated deployment, to integration with application development processes, you’re going to want to place your database into source control. Using Red Gate SQL Source Control this process is extremely simple. SQL Source Control works within your SQL Server Management Studio (SSMS) interface.  This means you can work with your databases in any way that you’re used to working with them. If you prefer scripts to using the GUI, not a problem. If you prefer using the GUI to having to learn T-SQL, again, that’s fine. After installing SQL Source Control, this is what you’ll see when you open SSMS:   SQL Source Control is now a direct piece of the SSMS environment. The key point initially is that I currently don’t have a database selected. You can even see that in the SQL Source Control window where it shows, in red, “No database selected – select a database in Object Explorer.” If I expand my Databases list in the Object Explorer, you’ll be able to immediately see which databases have been integrated with source control and which have not. There are visible differences between the databases as you can see here:   To add a database to source control, I first have to select it. For this example, I’m going to add the AdventureWorks2012 database to an instance of the SVN source control software (I’m using uberSVN). When I click on the AdventureWorks2012 database, the SQL Source Control screen changes:   I’m going to need to click on the “Link database to source control” text which will open up a window for connecting this database to the source control system of my choice.  You can pick from the default source control systems on the left, or define one of your own. I also have to provide the connection string for the location within the source control system where I’ll be storing my database code. I set these up in advance. You’ll need two. One for the main set of scripts and one for special scripts called Migrations that deal with different kinds of changes between versions of the code. Migrations help you solve problems like having to create or modify data in columns as part of a structural change. I’ll talk more about them another day. Finally, I have to determine if this is an isolated environment that I’m going to be the only one use, a dedicated database. Or, if I’m sharing the database in a shared environment with other developers, a shared database.  The main difference is, under a dedicated database, I will need to regularly get any changes that other developers have made from source control and integrate it into my database. While, under a shared database, all changes for all developers are made at the same time, which means you could commit other peoples work without proper testing. It all depends on the type of environment you work within. But, when it’s all set, it will look like this: SQL Source Control will compare the results between the empty folders in source control and the database, AdventureWorks2012. You’ll get a report showing exactly the list of differences and you can choose which ones will get checked into source control. Each of the database objects is scripted individually. You’ll be able to modify them later in the same way. Here’s the list of differences for my new database:   You can select/deselect all the objects or each object individually. You also get a report showing the differences between what’s in the database and what’s in source control. If there was already a database in source control, you’d only see changes to database objects rather than every single object. You can see that the database objects can be sorted by name, by type, or other choices. I’m going to add a comment such as “Initial creation of database in source control.” And then click on the Commit button which will put all the objects in my database into the source control system. That’s all it takes to get the objects into source control initially. Now is when things can get fun with breaking changes to code, automated deployments, unit testing and all the rest.

    Read the article

  • Inversion of control domain objects construction problem

    - by Andrey
    Hello! As I understand IoC-container is helpful in creation of application-level objects like services and factories. But domain-level objects should be created manually. Spring's manual tells us: "Typically one does not configure fine-grained domain objects in the container, because it is usually the responsibility of DAOs and business logic to create/load domain objects." Well. But what if my domain "fine-grained" object depends on some application-level object. For example I have an UserViewer(User user, UserConstants constants) class. There user is domain object which cannot be injected, but UserViewer also needs UserConstants which is high-level object injected by IoC-container. I want to inject UserConstants from the IoC-container, but I also need a transient runtime parameter User here. What is wrong with the design? Thanks in advance! UPDATE It seems I was not precise enough with my question. What I really need is an example how to do this: create instance of class UserViewer(User user, UserService service), where user is passed as the parameter and service is injected from IoC. If I inject UserViewer viewer then how do I pass user to it? If I create UserViewer viewer manually then how do I pass service to it?

    Read the article

  • Acceptable placement of the composition root using dependency injection and inversion of control containers

    - by Lumirris
    I've read in several sources including Mark Seemann's 'Ploeh' blog about how the appropriate placement of the composition root of an IoC container is as close as possible to the entry point of an application. In the .NET world, these applications seem to be commonly thought of as Web projects, WPF projects, console applications, things with a typical UI (read: not library projects). Is it really going against this sage advice to place the composition root at the entry point of a library project, when it represents the logical entry point of a group of library projects, and the client of a project group such as this is someone else's work, whose author can't or won't add the composition root to their project (a UI project or yet another library project, even)? I'm familiar with Ninject as an IoC container implementation, but I imagine many others work the same way in that they can scan for a module containing all the necessary binding configurations. This means I could put a binding module in its own library project to compile with my main library project's output, and if the client wanted to change the configuration (an unlikely scenario in my case), they could drop in a replacement dll to replace the library with the binding module. This seems to avoid the most common clients having to deal with dependency injection and composition roots at all, and would make for the cleanest API for the library project group. Yet this seems to fly in the face of conventional wisdom on the issue. Is it just that most of the advice out there makes the assumption that the developer has some coordination with the development of the UI project(s) as well, rather than my case, in which I'm just developing libraries for others to use?

    Read the article

  • Are IoC containers about configuration files?

    - by Jader Dias
    Recently I developed a performance tester console application, with no UI, with the help of a IoC containter (Castle-Windsor-Microkernel). This library enabled me to let the user choose which test(s) to run, simply by changing the configuration file. Have I realized what IoC containers are about? I'm not sure. Even Joel said here on SO that IoC are difficult to understand. From my example, what do you conclude? Am I using IoC container for exactly what they were designed for? Or I am just using one of its secondary features?

    Read the article

  • How do I manage object disposal when I use IoC?

    - by Aval
    My case it is Ninject 2. // normal explicit dispose using (var dc = new EFContext) { } But sometimes I need to keep the context longer or between function calls. So I want to control this behavior through IoC scope. // if i use this way. how do i make sure object is disposed. var dc = ninject.Get<IContext>() // i cannot use this since the scope can change to singleton. right ?? using (var dc = ninject.Get<IContext>()) { } Sample scopes Container.Bind<IContext>().To<EFContext>().InSingletonScope(); // OR Container.Bind<IContext>().To<EFContext>().InRequestScope();

    Read the article

  • IoC containers and service locator pattern

    - by TheSilverBullet
    I am trying to get an understanding of Inversion of Control and the dos and donts of this. Of all the articles I read, there is one by Mark Seemann (which is widely linked to in SO) which strongly asks folks not to use the service locator pattern. Then somewhere along the way, I came across this article by Ken where he helps us build our own IoC. I noticed that is is nothing but an implementation of service locator pattern. Questions: Is my observation correct that this implementation is the service locator pattern? If the answer to 1. is yes, then Do all IoC containers (like Autofac) use the service locator pattern? If the answer to 1. is no, then why is this differen? Is there any other pattern (other than DI) for inversion of control?

    Read the article

  • Injecting Dependencies into Domain Model classes with Nhibernate (ASP.NET MVC + IOC)

    - by Sunday Ironfoot
    I'm building an ASP.NET MVC application that uses a DDD (Domain Driven Design) approach with database access handled by NHibernate. I have domain model class (Administrator) that I want to inject a dependency into via an IOC Container such as Castle Windsor, something like this: public class Administrator { public virtual int Id { get; set; } //.. snip ..// public virtual string HashedPassword { get; protected set; } public void SetPassword(string plainTextPassword) { IHashingService hasher = IocContainer.Resolve<IHashingService>(); this.HashedPassword = hasher.Hash(plainTextPassword); } } I basically want to inject IHashingService for the SetPassword method without calling the IOC Container directly (because this is suppose to be an IOC Anti-pattern). But I'm not sure how to go about doing it. My Administrator object either gets instantiated via new Administrator(); or it gets loaded via NHibernate, so how would I inject the IHashingService into the Administrator class? On second thoughts, am I going about this the right way? I was hoping to avoid having my codebase littered with... currentAdmin.Password = HashUtils.Hash(password, Algorithm.Sha512); ...and instead get the domain model itself to take care of hashing and neatly encapsulate it away. I can envisage another developer accidently choosing the wrong algorithm and having some passwords as Sha512, and some as MD5, some with one salt, and some with a different salt etc. etc. Instead if developers are writing... currentAdmin.SetPassword(password); ...then that would hide those details away and take care of those problems listed above would it not?

    Read the article

  • Databases in Source Control

    - by Grant Fritchey
    I’ve been working as a database professional for quite a long time. But originally, I was a developer. And I loved being a developer. There was this constant feedback loop of a job well done, your code compiled and it ran. Every time this happened successfully, you’d check it into source control. These days you have to add another step; the code passed all the tests, unit, line, regression, qa, whatever, then into source control it goes. As a matter of fact, when I first made the jump from developer to DBA/database developer/database professional, source control was the one thing I couldn’t believe was missing from the DBA toolbox. Come to find out, source control was only the beginning of what was missing from your standard DBAs set of skills. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not disrespecting the DBA. They’re focused where they should be, on your production data. But there has to be a method for developing applications that include databases and the database side of that development and deployment process has long been lacking. This lack of development and deployment methodologies is a part of what has given rise to some of the wackier implementations of Object Relational Mapping tools, the NoSQL movement, and some of the other foul cursing that is directed towards databases, DBAs, and database development by application developers. Some of that is well earned. A lot isn’t. But it is a fact that database professionals, in general, do not have as sophisticated a model for managing development and deployment as application developers do. We could charge out and start trying to come up with our own standards and methods. I’m sure people have done exactly that. However, I’m lazy, and not terribly bright. Rather than try to invent a whole new process, I’m going to look to my developer roots and choose instead to emulate the developers. They’re sitting over there across the hall from me working with SCRUM/Agile/Waterfall/Object Driven/Feature Driven/Test Driven development processes that they’ve been polishing for years. What if I just started working on database development the same way they work on code development? Win! Ah, but now I have to have a mechanism for treating my database like application code. First, I need a method for getting it into source control. That’s where Red Gate’s SQL Source Control comes into the picture. SQL Source Control works within SQL Server Management Studio to connect your database objects up to the source control system of your choice. Right out of the box SQL Source Control can link to TFS, SVN or Vault. With a little work you can connect it to Git or just about any other source control system. With the ability to get my database into source control, a lot of possibilities for more direct integration with the application development teams open up.

    Read the article

  • Creating an object that is ready to be used & unset properties - with IoC

    - by GetFuzzy
    I have a question regarding the specifics of object creation and the usage of properties. A best practice is to put all the properties into a state such that the object is useful when its created. Object constructors help ensure that required dependencies are created. I've found myself following a pattern lately, and then questioning its appropriateness. The pattern looks like this... public class ThingProcesser { public List<Thing> CalculatedThings { get; set; } public ThingProcesser() { CalculatedThings = new List<Thing>(); } public double FindCertainThing() { CheckForException(); foreach (var thing in CalculatedThings) { //do some stuff with things... } } public double FindOtherThing() { CheckForException(); foreach (var thing in CalculatedThings) { //do some stuff with things... } } private void CheckForException() { if (CalculatedThings.Count < 2) throw new InvalidOperationException("Calculated things must have more than 2 items"); } } The list of items is not being changed, just looked through by the methods. There are several methods on the class, and to avoid having to pass the list of things to each function as a method parameter, I set it once on the class. While this works, does it violate the principle of least astonishment? Since starting to use IoC I find myself not sticking things into the constructor, to avoid having to use a factory pattern. For example, I can argue with myself and say well the ThingProcessor really needs a List to work, so the object should be constructed like this. public class ThingProcesser { public List<Thing> CalculatedThings { get; set; } public ThingProcesser(List<Thing> calculatedThings) { CalculatedThings = calculatedThings; } } However, if I did this, it would complicate things for IoC, and this scenario hardly seems appropriate for something like the factory pattern. So in summary, are there some good guidelines for when something should be part of the object state, vs. passed as a method parameter? When using IoC, is the factory pattern the best way to deal with objects that need created with state? If something has to be passed to multiple methods in a class, does that render it a good candidate to be part of the objects state?

    Read the article

  • September 2011 Release of the Ajax Control Toolkit

    - by Stephen Walther
    I’m happy to announce the release of the September 2011 Ajax Control Toolkit. This release has several important new features including: Date ranges – When using the Calendar extender, you can specify a start and end date and a user can pick only those dates which fall within the specified range. This was the fourth top-voted feature request for the Ajax Control Toolkit at CodePlex. Twitter Control – You can use the new Twitter control to display recent tweets associated with a particular Twitter user or tweets which match a search query. Gravatar Control – You can use the new Gravatar control to display a unique image for each user of your website. Users can upload custom images to the Gravatar.com website or the Gravatar control can display a unique, auto-generated, image for a user. You can download this release this very minute by visiting CodePlex: http://AjaxControlToolkit.CodePlex.com Alternatively, you can execute the following command from the Visual Studio NuGet console: Improvements to the Ajax Control Toolkit Calendar Control The Ajax Control Toolkit Calendar extender control is one of the most heavily used controls from the Ajax Control Toolkit. The developers on the Superexpert team spent the last sprint focusing on improving this control. There are three important changes that we made to the Calendar control: we added support for date ranges, we added support for highlighting today’s date, and we made fixes to several bugs related to time zones and daylight savings. Using Calendar Date Ranges One of the top-voted feature requests for the Ajax Control Toolkit was a request to add support for date ranges to the Calendar control (this was the fourth most voted feature request at CodePlex). With the latest release of the Ajax Control Toolkit, the Calendar extender now supports date ranges. For example, the following page illustrates how you can create a popup calendar which allows a user only to pick dates between March 2, 2009 and May 16, 2009. <%@ Page Language="C#" AutoEventWireup="true" CodeBehind="CalendarDateRange.aspx.cs" Inherits="WebApplication1.CalendarDateRange" %> <%@ Register TagPrefix="asp" Namespace="AjaxControlToolkit" Assembly="AjaxControlToolkit" %> <html> <head runat="server"> <title>Calendar Date Range</title> </head> <body> <form id="form1" runat="server"> <asp:ToolkitScriptManager ID="tsm" runat="server" /> <asp:TextBox ID="txtHotelReservationDate" runat="server" /> <asp:CalendarExtender ID="Calendar1" TargetControlID="txtHotelReservationDate" StartDate="3/2/2009" EndDate="5/16/2009" SelectedDate="3/2/2009" runat="server" /> </form> </body> </html> This page contains three controls: an Ajax Control Toolkit ToolkitScriptManager control, a standard ASP.NET TextBox control, and an Ajax Control Toolkit CalendarExtender control. Notice that the Calendar control includes StartDate and EndDate properties which restrict the range of valid dates. The Calendar control shows days, months, and years outside of the valid range as struck out. You cannot select days, months, or years which fall outside of the range. The following video illustrates interacting with the new date range feature: If you want to experiment with a live version of the Ajax Control Toolkit Calendar extender control then you can visit the Calendar Sample Page at the Ajax Control Toolkit Sample Site. Highlighted Today’s Date Another highly requested feature for the Calendar control was support for highlighting today’s date. The Calendar control now highlights the user’s current date regardless of the user’s time zone. Fixes to Time Zone and Daylight Savings Time Bugs We fixed several significant Calendar extender bugs related to time zones and daylight savings time. For example, previously, when you set the Calendar control’s SelectedDate property to the value 1/1/2007 then the selected data would appear as 12/31/2006 or 1/1/2007 or 1/2/2007 depending on the server time zone. For example, if your server time zone was set to Samoa (UTC-11:00), then setting SelectedDate=”1/1/2007” would result in “12/31/2006” being selected in the Calendar. Users of the Calendar extender control found this behavior confusing. After careful consideration, we decided to change the Calendar extender so that it interprets all dates as UTC dates. In other words, if you set StartDate=”1/1/2007” then the Calendar extender parses the date as 1/1/2007 UTC instead of parsing the date according to the server time zone. By interpreting all dates as UTC dates, we avoid all of the reported issues with the SelectedDate property showing the wrong date. Furthermore, when you set the StartDate and EndDate properties, you know that the same StartDate and EndDate will be selected regardless of the time zone associated with the server or associated with the browser. The date 1/1/2007 will always be the date 1/1/2007. The New Twitter Control This release of the Ajax Control Toolkit introduces a new twitter control. You can use the Twitter control to display recent tweets associated with a particular twitter user. You also can use this control to show the results of a twitter search. The following page illustrates how you can use the Twitter control to display recent tweets made by Scott Hanselman: <%@ Page Language="C#" AutoEventWireup="true" CodeBehind="TwitterProfile.aspx.cs" Inherits="WebApplication1.TwitterProfile" %> <%@ Register TagPrefix="asp" Namespace="AjaxControlToolkit" Assembly="AjaxControlToolkit" %> <html > <head runat="server"> <title>Twitter Profile</title> </head> <body> <form id="form1" runat="server"> <asp:ToolkitScriptManager ID="tsm" runat="server" /> <asp:Twitter ID="Twitter1" ScreenName="shanselman" runat="server" /> </form> </body> </html> This page includes two Ajax Control Toolkit controls: the ToolkitScriptManager control and the Twitter control. The Twitter control is set to display tweets from Scott Hanselman (shanselman): You also can use the Twitter control to display the results of a search query. For example, the following page displays all recent tweets related to the Ajax Control Toolkit: Twitter limits the number of times that you can interact with their API in an hour. Twitter recommends that you cache results on the server (https://dev.twitter.com/docs/rate-limiting). By default, the Twitter control caches results on the server for a duration of 5 minutes. You can modify the cache duration by assigning a value (in seconds) to the Twitter control's CacheDuration property. The Twitter control wraps a standard ASP.NET ListView control. You can customize the appearance of the Twitter control by modifying its LayoutTemplate, StatusTemplate, AlternatingStatusTemplate, and EmptyDataTemplate. To learn more about the new Twitter control, visit the live Twitter Sample Page. The New Gravatar Control The September 2011 release of the Ajax Control Toolkit also includes a new Gravatar control. This control makes it easy to display a unique image for each user of your website. A Gravatar is associated with an email address. You can visit Gravatar.com and upload an image and associate the image with your email address. That way, every website which uses Gravatars (such as the www.ASP.NET website) will display your image next to your name. For example, I visited the Gravatar.com website and associated an image of a Koala Bear with the email address [email protected]. The following page illustrates how you can use the Gravatar control to display the Gravatar image associated with the [email protected] email address: <%@ Page Language="C#" AutoEventWireup="true" CodeBehind="GravatarDemo.aspx.cs" Inherits="WebApplication1.GravatarDemo" %> <%@ Register TagPrefix="asp" Namespace="AjaxControlToolkit" Assembly="AjaxControlToolkit" %> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head id="Head1" runat="server"> <title>Gravatar Demo</title> </head> <body> <form id="form1" runat="server"> <asp:ToolkitScriptManager ID="tsm" runat="server" /> <asp:Gravatar ID="Gravatar1" Email="[email protected]" runat="server" /> </form> </body> </html> The page above simply displays the Gravatar image associated with the [email protected] email address: If a user has not uploaded an image to Gravatar.com then you can auto-generate a unique image for the user from the user email address. The Gravatar control supports four types of auto-generated images: Identicon -- A different geometric pattern is generated for each unrecognized email. MonsterId -- A different image of a monster is generated for each unrecognized email. Wavatar -- A different image of a face is generated for each unrecognized email. Retro -- A different 8-bit arcade-style face is generated for each unrecognized email. For example, there is no Gravatar image associated with the email address [email protected]. The following page displays an auto-generated MonsterId for this email address: <%@ Page Language="C#" AutoEventWireup="true" CodeBehind="GravatarMonster.aspx.cs" Inherits="WebApplication1.GravatarMonster" %> <%@ Register TagPrefix="asp" Namespace="AjaxControlToolkit" Assembly="AjaxControlToolkit" %> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head id="Head1" runat="server"> <title>Gravatar Monster</title> </head> <body> <form id="form1" runat="server"> <asp:ToolkitScriptManager ID="tsm" runat="server" /> <asp:Gravatar ID="Gravatar1" Email="[email protected]" DefaultImageBehavior="MonsterId" runat="server" /> </form> </body> </html> The page above generates the following image automatically from the supplied email address: To learn more about the properties of the new Gravatar control, visit the live Gravatar Sample Page. ASP.NET Connections Talk on the Ajax Control Toolkit If you are interested in learning more about the changes that we are making to the Ajax Control Toolkit then please come to my talk on the Ajax Control Toolkit at the upcoming ASP.NET Connections conference. In the talk, I will present a summary of the changes that we have made to the Ajax Control Toolkit over the last several months and discuss our future plans. Do you have ideas for new Ajax Control Toolkit controls? Ideas for improving the toolkit? Come to my talk – I would love to hear from you. You can register for the ASP.NET Connections conference by visiting the following website: Register for ASP.NET Connections   Summary The previous release of the Ajax Control Toolkit – the July 2011 Release – has had over 100,000 downloads. That is a huge number of developers who are working with the Ajax Control Toolkit. We are really excited about the new features which we added to the Ajax Control Toolkit in the latest September sprint. We hope that you find the updated Calender control, the new Twitter control, and the new Gravatar control valuable when building your ASP.NET Web Forms applications.

    Read the article

  • July 2013 Release of the Ajax Control Toolkit

    - by Stephen.Walther
    I’m super excited to announce the July 2013 release of the Ajax Control Toolkit. You can download the new version of the Ajax Control Toolkit from CodePlex (http://ajaxControlToolkit.CodePlex.com) or install the Ajax Control Toolkit from NuGet: With this release, we have completely rewritten the way the Ajax Control Toolkit combines, minifies, gzips, and caches JavaScript files. The goal of this release was to improve the performance of the Ajax Control Toolkit and make it easier to create custom Ajax Control Toolkit controls. Improving Ajax Control Toolkit Performance Previous releases of the Ajax Control Toolkit optimized performance for a single page but not multiple pages. When you visited each page in an app, the Ajax Control Toolkit would combine all of the JavaScript files required by the controls in the page into a new JavaScript file. So, even if every page in your app used the exact same controls, visitors would need to download a new combined Ajax Control Toolkit JavaScript file for each page visited. Downloading new scripts for each page that you visit does not lead to good performance. In general, you want to make as few requests for JavaScript files as possible and take maximum advantage of caching. For most apps, you would get much better performance if you could specify all of the Ajax Control Toolkit controls that you need for your entire app and create a single JavaScript file which could be used across your entire app. What a great idea! Introducing Control Bundles With this release of the Ajax Control Toolkit, we introduce the concept of Control Bundles. You define a Control Bundle to indicate the set of Ajax Control Toolkit controls that you want to use in your app. You define Control Bundles in a file located in the root of your application named AjaxControlToolkit.config. For example, the following AjaxControlToolkit.config file defines two Control Bundles: <ajaxControlToolkit> <controlBundles> <controlBundle> <control name="CalendarExtender" /> <control name="ComboBox" /> </controlBundle> <controlBundle name="CalendarBundle"> <control name="CalendarExtender"></control> </controlBundle> </controlBundles> </ajaxControlToolkit> The first Control Bundle in the file above does not have a name. When a Control Bundle does not have a name then it becomes the default Control Bundle for your entire application. The default Control Bundle is used by the ToolkitScriptManager by default. For example, the default Control Bundle is used when you declare the ToolkitScriptManager like this:  <ajaxToolkit:ToolkitScriptManager runat=”server” /> The default Control Bundle defined in the file above includes all of the scripts required for the CalendarExtender and ComboBox controls. All of the scripts required for both of these controls are combined, minified, gzipped, and cached automatically. The AjaxControlToolkit.config file above also defines a second Control Bundle with the name CalendarBundle. Here’s how you would use the CalendarBundle with the ToolkitScriptManager: <ajaxToolkit:ToolkitScriptManager runat="server"> <ControlBundles> <ajaxToolkit:ControlBundle Name="CalendarBundle" /> </ControlBundles> </ajaxToolkit:ToolkitScriptManager> In this case, only the JavaScript files required by the CalendarExtender control, and not the ComboBox, would be downloaded because the CalendarBundle lists only the CalendarExtender control. You can use multiple named control bundles with the ToolkitScriptManager and you will get all of the scripts from both bundles. Support for ControlBundles is a new feature of the ToolkitScriptManager that we introduced with this release. We extended the ToolkitScriptManager to support the Control Bundles that you can define in the AjaxControlToolkit.config file. Let me be explicit about the rules for Control Bundles: 1. If you do not create an AjaxControlToolkit.config file then the ToolkitScriptManager will download all of the JavaScript files required for all of the controls in the Ajax Control Toolkit. This is the easy but low performance option. 2. If you create an AjaxControlToolkit.config file and create a ControlBundle without a name then the ToolkitScriptManager uses that Control Bundle by default. For example, if you plan to use only the CalendarExtender and ComboBox controls in your application then you should create a default bundle that lists only these two controls. 3. If you create an AjaxControlToolkit.config file and create one or more named Control Bundles then you can use these named Control Bundles with the ToolkitScriptManager. For example, you might want to use different subsets of the Ajax Control Toolkit controls in different sections of your app. I should also mention that you can use the AjaxControlToolkit.config file with custom Ajax Control Toolkit controls – new controls that you write. For example, here is how you would register a set of custom controls from an assembly named MyAssembly: <ajaxControlToolkit> <controlBundles> <controlBundle name="CustomBundle"> <control name="MyAssembly.MyControl1" assembly="MyAssembly" /> <control name="MyAssembly.MyControl2" assembly="MyAssembly" /> </controlBundle> </ajaxControlToolkit> What about ASP.NET Bundling and Minification? The idea of Control Bundles is similar to the idea of Script Bundles used in ASP.NET Bundling and Minification. You might be wondering why we didn’t simply use Script Bundles with the Ajax Control Toolkit. There were several reasons. First, ASP.NET Bundling does not work with scripts embedded in an assembly. Because all of the scripts used by the Ajax Control Toolkit are embedded in the AjaxControlToolkit.dll assembly, ASP.NET Bundling was not an option. Second, Web Forms developers typically think at the level of controls and not at the level of individual scripts. We believe that it makes more sense for a Web Forms developer to specify the controls that they need in an app (CalendarExtender, ToggleButton) instead of the individual scripts that they need in an app (the 15 or so scripts required by the CalenderExtender). Finally, ASP.NET Bundling does not work with older versions of ASP.NET. The Ajax Control Toolkit needs to support ASP.NET 3.5, ASP.NET 4.0, and ASP.NET 4.5. Therefore, using ASP.NET Bundling was not an option. There is nothing wrong with using Control Bundles and Script Bundles side-by-side. The ASP.NET 4.0 and 4.5 ToolkitScriptManager supports both approaches to bundling scripts. Using the AjaxControlToolkit.CombineScriptsHandler Browsers cache JavaScript files by URL. For example, if you request the exact same JavaScript file from two different URLs then the exact same JavaScript file must be downloaded twice. However, if you request the same JavaScript file from the same URL more than once then it only needs to be downloaded once. With this release of the Ajax Control Toolkit, we have introduced a new HTTP Handler named the AjaxControlToolkit.CombineScriptsHandler. If you register this handler in your web.config file then the Ajax Control Toolkit can cache your JavaScript files for up to one year in the future automatically. You should register the handler in two places in your web.config file: in the <httpHandlers> section and the <system.webServer> section (don’t forget to register the handler for the AjaxFileUpload while you are there!). <httpHandlers> <add verb="*" path="AjaxFileUploadHandler.axd" type="AjaxControlToolkit.AjaxFileUploadHandler, AjaxControlToolkit" /> <add verb="*" path="CombineScriptsHandler.axd" type="AjaxControlToolkit.CombineScriptsHandler, AjaxControlToolkit" /> </httpHandlers> <system.webServer> <validation validateIntegratedModeConfiguration="false" /> <handlers> <add name="AjaxFileUploadHandler" verb="*" path="AjaxFileUploadHandler.axd" type="AjaxControlToolkit.AjaxFileUploadHandler, AjaxControlToolkit" /> <add name="CombineScriptsHandler" verb="*" path="CombineScriptsHandler.axd" type="AjaxControlToolkit.CombineScriptsHandler, AjaxControlToolkit" /> </handlers> <system.webServer> The handler is only used in release mode and not in debug mode. You can enable release mode in your web.config file like this: <compilation debug=”false”> You also can override the web.config setting with the ToolkitScriptManager like this: <act:ToolkitScriptManager ScriptMode=”Release” runat=”server”/> In release mode, scripts are combined, minified, gzipped, and cached with a far future cache header automatically. When the handler is not registered, scripts are requested from the page that contains the ToolkitScriptManager: When the handler is registered in the web.config file, scripts are requested from the handler: If you want the best performance, always register the handler. That way, the Ajax Control Toolkit can cache the bundled scripts across page requests with a far future cache header. If you don’t register the handler then a new JavaScript file must be downloaded whenever you travel to a new page. Dynamic Bundling and Minification Previous releases of the Ajax Control Toolkit used a Visual Studio build task to minify the JavaScript files used by the Ajax Control Toolkit controls. The disadvantage of this approach to minification is that it made it difficult to create custom Ajax Control Toolkit controls. Starting with this release of the Ajax Control Toolkit, we support dynamic minification. The JavaScript files in the Ajax Control Toolkit are minified at runtime instead of at build time. Scripts are minified only when in release mode. You can specify release mode with the web.config file or with the ToolkitScriptManager ScriptMode property. Because of this change, the Ajax Control Toolkit now depends on the Ajax Minifier. You must include a reference to AjaxMin.dll in your Visual Studio project or you cannot take advantage of runtime minification. If you install the Ajax Control Toolkit from NuGet then AjaxMin.dll is added to your project as a NuGet dependency automatically. If you download the Ajax Control Toolkit from CodePlex then the AjaxMin.dll is included in the download. This change means that you no longer need to do anything special to create a custom Ajax Control Toolkit. As an open source project, we hope more people will contribute to the Ajax Control Toolkit (Yes, I am looking at you.) We have been working hard on making it much easier to create new custom controls. More on this subject with the next release of the Ajax Control Toolkit. A Single Visual Studio Solution We also made substantial changes to the Visual Studio solution and projects used by the Ajax Control Toolkit with this release. This change will matter to you only if you need to work directly with the Ajax Control Toolkit source code. In previous releases of the Ajax Control Toolkit, we maintained separate solution and project files for ASP.NET 3.5, ASP.NET 4.0, and ASP.NET 4.5. Starting with this release, we now support a single Visual Studio 2012 solution that takes advantage of multi-targeting to build ASP.NET 3.5, ASP.NET 4.0, and ASP.NET 4.5 versions of the toolkit. This change means that you need Visual Studio 2012 to open the Ajax Control Toolkit project downloaded from CodePlex. For details on how we setup multi-targeting, please see Budi Adiono’s blog post: http://www.budiadiono.com/2013/07/25/visual-studio-2012-multi-targeting-framework-project/ Summary You can take advantage of this release of the Ajax Control Toolkit to significantly improve the performance of your website. You need to do two things: 1) You need to create an AjaxControlToolkit.config file which lists the controls used in your app and 2) You need to register the AjaxControlToolkit.CombineScriptsHandler in the web.config file. We made substantial changes to the Ajax Control Toolkit with this release. We think these changes will result in much better performance for multipage apps and make the process of building custom controls much easier. As always, we look forward to hearing your feedback.

    Read the article

  • Dependency injection and IOC containers in a closed project

    - by Puckl
    Does it make sense to assemble my project with dependency injection containers if I am the only one who will use the code of that project? The question came up when I read this IOC Article http://martinfowler.com/articles/injection.html The justification for using dependency injection in this article is that friends can reuse a class, and replace depending classes with their own classes because they get injected and not instantiated in the class. I would only use it to inject objects where they are needed instead of passing them through layers to their target. (Which is not so bad I learned here: Is it bad practice to pass instances through several layers?) (Maybe I will reuse parts of the project, who knows, but I don´t know if that is a good justification)

    Read the article

  • Database Context and Singleton injection with IoC

    - by zaitsman
    All of the below relates to a ASP.NET c# app. I have a Singleton Settings MemoryCache that reads values from database on first access and caches these, then invalidates them using SQL Service Broker message and re-reads as required. For the purposes of standard controllers, i create my Db Context in a request scope. However, this obviously means that i can't use the same context in the Settings Cache class, since that is a singleton and we have a scope collision. At the moment, i ended up with two db contexts - the Controllers get it via IoC container, whereas a Singleton just creates it's own. However, i am not satisfied with this approach (mostly due to the way i feel about two contexts, the cache doesn't set anything on the db hence concurrency is not an issue as much). What is a better way to do it?

    Read the article

  • IoC.Resolve vs Constructor Injection

    - by Omu
    I heard a lot of people saying that it is a bad practice to use IoC.Resolve(), but I never heard a good reason why (if it's all about testing than you can just mock the container, and you're done). now the advantages of using Resolve instead of Constructor Injection is that you don't need to create classes that have 5 parameters in the constructor, and whenever you are going to create a instance of that class you're not gonna need to provide it with anything

    Read the article

  • When to use an IOC container?

    - by nivlam
    I'm trying to understand when I should use a container versus manually injecting dependencies. If I have an application that uses a 1-2 interfaces and only has 1-2 concrete implementations for each interface, I would lean towards just handling that myself. If I have a small application that uses 2-3 interfaces and each interface has 2-3 concrete implementations, should I use a full-blown container? Would something something simple like this suffice? Basically I'm trying to understand when it's appropriate to manually handle these dependencies, when (or if) I should use something simple like the above, and when to use an IOC container like Ninject, Windsor, etc....

    Read the article

  • IoC container configuration

    - by nivlam
    How should the configuration for an IoC container be organized? I know that registering by code should be placed at the highest level in an application, but what if an application had hundreds of dependencies that need to be registered? Same with XML configurations. I know that you can split up the XML configurations into multiple files, but that would seem like it would become a maintenance hassle if someone had to dig through multiple XML files. Are there any best practices for organizing the registration of dependencies? From all the videos and tutorials that I've seen, the code used in the demo were simple enough to place in a single location. I have yet to come across a sample application that utilizes a large number of dependencies.

    Read the article

  • Dependency Injection Confusion

    - by James
    I think I have a decent grasp of what Dependency Inversion principle (DIP) is, my confusion is more around dependency injection. My understanding is the whole point of DI is to decouple parts of an application, to allow changes in one part without effecting another, assuming the interface does not change. For examples sake, we have this public class MyClass(IMyInterface interface) { public MyClass { interface.DoSomething(); } } public interface IMyInterface { void DoSomething(); } How is this var iocContainer = new UnityContainer(); iocContainer.Resolve<MyClass>(); better practice than doing this //if multiple implementations are possible, could use a factory here. IMyInterface interface = new InterfaceImplementation(); var myClass = new MyClass(interface); It may be I am missing a very important point, but I am failing to see what is gained. I am aware that using an IOC container I can easily handle an objects life cycle, which is a +1 but I don't think that is core to what IOC is about.

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >