Search Results

Search found 62182 results on 2488 pages for 'asp net mvc controller'.

Page 12/2488 | < Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >

  • ActionResult types in MVC2

    - by rajbk
    In ASP.NET MVC, incoming browser requests gets mapped to a controller action method. The action method returns a type of ActionResult in response to the browser request. A basic example is shown below: public class HomeController : Controller { public ActionResult Index() { return View(); } } Here we have an action method called Index that returns an ActionResult. Inside the method we call the View() method on the base Controller. The View() method, as you will see shortly, is a method that returns a ViewResult. The ActionResult class is the base class for different controller results. The following diagram shows the types derived from the ActionResult type. ASP.NET has a description of these methods ContentResult – Represents a text result. EmptyResult – Represents no result. FileContentResult – Represents a downloadable file (with the binary content). FilePathResult – Represents a downloadable file (with a path). FileStreamResult – Represents a downloadable file (with a file stream). JavaScriptResult – Represents a JavaScript script. JsonResult – Represents a JavaScript Object Notation result that can be used in an AJAX application. PartialViewResult – Represents HTML and markup rendered by a partial view. RedirectResult – Represents a redirection to a new URL. RedirectToRouteResult – Represents a result that performs a redirection by using the specified route values dictionary. ViewResult – Represents HTML and markup rendered by a view. To return the types shown above, you call methods that are available in the Controller base class. A list of these methods are shown below.   Methods without an ActionResult return type The MVC framework will translate action methods that do not return an ActionResult into one. Consider the HomeController below which has methods that do not return any ActionResult types. The methods defined return an int, object and void respectfully. public class HomeController : Controller { public int Add(int x, int y) { return x + y; }   public Employee GetEmployee() { return new Employee(); }   public void DoNothing() { } } When a request comes in, the Controller class hands internally uses a ControllerActionInvoker class which inspects the action parameters and invokes the correct action method. The CreateActionResult method in the ControllerActionInvoker class is used to return an ActionResult. This method is shown below. If the result of the action method is null, an EmptyResult instance is returned. If the result is not of type ActionResult, the result is converted to a string and returned as a ContentResult. protected virtual ActionResult CreateActionResult(ControllerContext controllerContext, ActionDescriptor actionDescriptor, object actionReturnValue) { if (actionReturnValue == null) { return new EmptyResult(); }   ActionResult actionResult = (actionReturnValue as ActionResult) ?? new ContentResult { Content = Convert.ToString(actionReturnValue, CultureInfo.InvariantCulture) }; return actionResult; }   In the HomeController class above, the DoNothing method will return an instance of the EmptyResult() Renders an empty webpage the GetEmployee() method will return a ContentResult which contains a string that represents the current object Renders the text “MyNameSpace.Controllers.Employee” without quotes. the Add method for a request of /home/add?x=3&y=5 returns a ContentResult Renders the text “8” without quotes. Unit Testing The nice thing about the ActionResult types is in unit testing the controller. We can, without starting a web server, create an instance of the Controller, call the methods and verify that the type returned is the expected ActionResult type. We can then inspect the returned type properties and confirm that it contains the expected values. Enjoy! Sulley: Hey, Mike, this might sound crazy but I don't think that kid's dangerous. Mike: Really? Well, in that case, let's keep it. I always wanted a pet that could kill me.

    Read the article

  • Anti-Forgery Request Recipes For ASP.NET MVC And AJAX

    - by Dixin
    Background To secure websites from cross-site request forgery (CSRF, or XSRF) attack, ASP.NET MVC provides an excellent mechanism: The server prints tokens to cookie and inside the form; When the form is submitted to server, token in cookie and token inside the form are sent in the HTTP request; Server validates the tokens. To print tokens to browser, just invoke HtmlHelper.AntiForgeryToken():<% using (Html.BeginForm()) { %> <%: this.Html.AntiForgeryToken(Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)%> <%-- Other fields. --%> <input type="submit" value="Submit" /> <% } %> This invocation generates a token then writes inside the form:<form action="..." method="post"> <input name="__RequestVerificationToken" type="hidden" value="J56khgCvbE3bVcsCSZkNVuH9Cclm9SSIT/ywruFsXEgmV8CL2eW5C/gGsQUf/YuP" /> <!-- Other fields. --> <input type="submit" value="Submit" /> </form> and also writes into the cookie: __RequestVerificationToken_Lw__= J56khgCvbE3bVcsCSZkNVuH9Cclm9SSIT/ywruFsXEgmV8CL2eW5C/gGsQUf/YuP When the above form is submitted, they are both sent to server. In the server side, [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute is used to specify the controllers or actions to validate them:[HttpPost] [ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public ActionResult Action(/* ... */) { // ... } This is very productive for form scenarios. But recently, when resolving security vulnerabilities for Web products, some problems are encountered. Specify validation on controller (not on each action) The server side problem is, It is expected to declare [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] on controller, but actually it has be to declared on each POST actions. Because POST actions are usually much more then controllers, the work would be a little crazy. Problem Usually a controller contains actions for HTTP GET and actions for HTTP POST requests, and usually validations are expected for HTTP POST requests. So, if the [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] is declared on the controller, the HTTP GET requests become invalid:[ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public class SomeController : Controller // One [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute. { [HttpGet] public ActionResult Index() // Index() cannot work. { // ... } [HttpPost] public ActionResult PostAction1(/* ... */) { // ... } [HttpPost] public ActionResult PostAction2(/* ... */) { // ... } // ... } If browser sends an HTTP GET request by clicking a link: http://Site/Some/Index, validation definitely fails, because no token is provided. So the result is, [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute must be distributed to each POST action:public class SomeController : Controller // Many [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attributes. { [HttpGet] public ActionResult Index() // Works. { // ... } [HttpPost] [ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public ActionResult PostAction1(/* ... */) { // ... } [HttpPost] [ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public ActionResult PostAction2(/* ... */) { // ... } // ... } This is a little bit crazy, because one application can have a lot of POST actions. Solution To avoid a large number of [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attributes (one for each POST action), the following ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute wrapper class can be helpful, where HTTP verbs can be specified:[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Class | AttributeTargets.Method, AllowMultiple = false, Inherited = true)] public class ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute : FilterAttribute, IAuthorizationFilter { private readonly ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute _validator; private readonly AcceptVerbsAttribute _verbs; public ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute(HttpVerbs verbs) : this(verbs, null) { } public ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute(HttpVerbs verbs, string salt) { this._verbs = new AcceptVerbsAttribute(verbs); this._validator = new ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute() { Salt = salt }; } public void OnAuthorization(AuthorizationContext filterContext) { string httpMethodOverride = filterContext.HttpContext.Request.GetHttpMethodOverride(); if (this._verbs.Verbs.Contains(httpMethodOverride, StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase)) { this._validator.OnAuthorization(filterContext); } } } When this attribute is declared on controller, only HTTP requests with the specified verbs are validated:[ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapper(HttpVerbs.Post, Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public class SomeController : Controller { // GET actions are not affected. // Only HTTP POST requests are validated. } Now one single attribute on controller turns on validation for all POST actions. Maybe it would be nice if HTTP verbs can be specified on the built-in [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute, which is easy to implemented. Specify Non-constant salt in runtime By default, the salt should be a compile time constant, so it can be used for the [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] or [ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapper] attribute. Problem One Web product might be sold to many clients. If a constant salt is evaluated in compile time, after the product is built and deployed to many clients, they all have the same salt. Of course, clients do not like this. Even some clients might want to specify a custom salt in configuration. In these scenarios, salt is required to be a runtime value. Solution In the above [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] and [ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapper] attribute, the salt is passed through constructor. So one solution is to remove this parameter:public class ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute : FilterAttribute, IAuthorizationFilter { public ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute(HttpVerbs verbs) { this._verbs = new AcceptVerbsAttribute(verbs); this._validator = new ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute() { Salt = AntiForgeryToken.Value }; } // Other members. } But here the injected dependency becomes a hard dependency. So the other solution is moving validation code into controller to work around the limitation of attributes:public abstract class AntiForgeryControllerBase : Controller { private readonly ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute _validator; private readonly AcceptVerbsAttribute _verbs; protected AntiForgeryControllerBase(HttpVerbs verbs, string salt) { this._verbs = new AcceptVerbsAttribute(verbs); this._validator = new ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute() { Salt = salt }; } protected override void OnAuthorization(AuthorizationContext filterContext) { base.OnAuthorization(filterContext); string httpMethodOverride = filterContext.HttpContext.Request.GetHttpMethodOverride(); if (this._verbs.Verbs.Contains(httpMethodOverride, StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase)) { this._validator.OnAuthorization(filterContext); } } } Then make controller classes inheriting from this AntiForgeryControllerBase class. Now the salt is no long required to be a compile time constant. Submit token via AJAX For browser side, once server side turns on anti-forgery validation for HTTP POST, all AJAX POST requests will fail by default. Problem In AJAX scenarios, the HTTP POST request is not sent by form. Take jQuery as an example:$.post(url, { productName: "Tofu", categoryId: 1 // Token is not posted. }, callback); This kind of AJAX POST requests will always be invalid, because server side code cannot see the token in the posted data. Solution Basically, the tokens must be printed to browser then sent back to server. So first of all, HtmlHelper.AntiForgeryToken() need to be called somewhere. Now the browser has token in both HTML and cookie. Then jQuery must find the printed token in the HTML, and append token to the data before sending:$.post(url, { productName: "Tofu", categoryId: 1, __RequestVerificationToken: getToken() // Token is posted. }, callback); To be reusable, this can be encapsulated into a tiny jQuery plugin:/// <reference path="jquery-1.4.2.js" /> (function ($) { $.getAntiForgeryToken = function (tokenWindow, appPath) { // HtmlHelper.AntiForgeryToken() must be invoked to print the token. tokenWindow = tokenWindow && typeof tokenWindow === typeof window ? tokenWindow : window; appPath = appPath && typeof appPath === "string" ? "_" + appPath.toString() : ""; // The name attribute is either __RequestVerificationToken, // or __RequestVerificationToken_{appPath}. tokenName = "__RequestVerificationToken" + appPath; // Finds the <input type="hidden" name={tokenName} value="..." /> from the specified. // var inputElements = $("input[type='hidden'][name='__RequestVerificationToken" + appPath + "']"); var inputElements = tokenWindow.document.getElementsByTagName("input"); for (var i = 0; i < inputElements.length; i++) { var inputElement = inputElements[i]; if (inputElement.type === "hidden" && inputElement.name === tokenName) { return { name: tokenName, value: inputElement.value }; } } return null; }; $.appendAntiForgeryToken = function (data, token) { // Converts data if not already a string. if (data && typeof data !== "string") { data = $.param(data); } // Gets token from current window by default. token = token ? token : $.getAntiForgeryToken(); // $.getAntiForgeryToken(window). data = data ? data + "&" : ""; // If token exists, appends {token.name}={token.value} to data. return token ? data + encodeURIComponent(token.name) + "=" + encodeURIComponent(token.value) : data; }; // Wraps $.post(url, data, callback, type). $.postAntiForgery = function (url, data, callback, type) { return $.post(url, $.appendAntiForgeryToken(data), callback, type); }; // Wraps $.ajax(settings). $.ajaxAntiForgery = function (settings) { settings.data = $.appendAntiForgeryToken(settings.data); return $.ajax(settings); }; })(jQuery); In most of the scenarios, it is Ok to just replace $.post() invocation with $.postAntiForgery(), and replace $.ajax() with $.ajaxAntiForgery():$.postAntiForgery(url, { productName: "Tofu", categoryId: 1 }, callback); // Token is posted. There might be some scenarios of custom token, where $.appendAntiForgeryToken() is useful:data = $.appendAntiForgeryToken(data, token); // Token is already in data. No need to invoke $.postAntiForgery(). $.post(url, data, callback); And there are scenarios that the token is not in the current window. For example, an HTTP POST request can be sent by an iframe, while the token is in the parent window. Here, token's container window can be specified for $.getAntiForgeryToken():data = $.appendAntiForgeryToken(data, $.getAntiForgeryToken(window.parent)); // Token is already in data. No need to invoke $.postAntiForgery(). $.post(url, data, callback); If you have better solution, please do tell me.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC AND TOOLBOX

    - by imran_ku07
       Introduction :           ASP.NET MVC popularity is not hidden from the today's world of web applications. One of the great thing in ASP.NET is the separation of concerns, in which presentation views are separate from the business or modal layer. In these views ASP.NET MVC provides some very good controls which generate commonly used HTML markup fragments using a shorter syntax. These presentation views are familiar to web forms developers. But a pain for developers to use these controls is that they need to type these helpers controls every time when they need to use a control, because they are more familiar to drag and drop controls from ToolBox. So in this article i will use a cool feature of Visual Studio that allows you to add these controls in ToolBox once and then, when needed, just drag and drop controls from ToolBox, very similar like in web forms.   Description :            Visual Studio ToolBox is rich enough that allows you to store code and HTML snippets in ToolBox. All you need is select the HTML Helper and then simply drag and drop into Toolbox. Repeat this Procedure for every HTML Helper in ASP.NET MVC.             When you need to use a HTML Helper, you can drag and drop it from ToolBox and become happy with drag and drop programming. Summary :              In this article you see that how Visual Studio helps you to drag and drop HTML snippets from Design view to toolbox. This is one of the coolest features in Visual Studio.

    Read the article

  • ASP.net access controls dynamically

    - by c11ada
    hey all, i have a table which looks similar to this <asp:TableRow><asp:TableCell>Question 1</asp:TableCell><asp:TableCell ID ="Question1Text"></asp:TableCell></asp:TableRow> <asp:TableRow><asp:TableCell ColumnSpan="2"> <asp:RadioButtonList ID="RadioButtonList1" runat="server"><asp:ListItem>Yes</asp:ListItem><asp:ListItem>No</asp:ListItem> </asp:RadioButtonList> </asp:TableCell></asp:TableRow> <asp:TableRow><asp:TableCell> <asp:TextBox ID="TextBox1" TextMode="MultiLine" runat="server"></asp:TextBox></asp:TableCell></asp:TableRow> <asp:TableRow><asp:TableCell>Question 2</asp:TableCell><asp:TableCell ID ="Question2Text"></asp:TableCell></asp:TableRow> <asp:TableRow><asp:TableCell ColumnSpan="2"> <asp:RadioButtonList ID="RadioButtonList2" runat="server"><asp:ListItem>Yes</asp:ListItem><asp:ListItem>No</asp:ListItem> </asp:RadioButtonList> </asp:TableCell></asp:TableRow> <asp:TableRow><asp:TableCell> <asp:TextBox ID="TextBox2" TextMode="MultiLine" runat="server"></asp:TextBox></asp:TableCell></asp:TableRow> i want to be able to systematically acces table cells with ID's for example for (int i = 1; i<3 ; i++) { // i want to be able to access the table cell with the ID Question1Text then Question2Text and so on } is this even possible ??

    Read the article

  • HttpModule with ASP.NET MVC not being called

    - by mgroves
    I am trying to implement a session-per-request pattern in an ASP.NET MVC 2 Preview 1 application, and I've implemented an IHttpModule to help me do this: public class SessionModule : IHttpModule { public void Init(HttpApplication context) { context.Response.Write("Init!"); context.EndRequest += context_EndRequest; } // ... etc... } And I've put this into the web.config: <system.web> <httpModules> <add name="SessionModule" type="MyNamespace.SessionModule" /> </httpModules> <system.webServer> <modules runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests="true"> <remove name="SessionModule" /> <add name="SessionModule" type="MyNamespace.SessionModule" /> </modules> However, "Init!" never gets written to the page (I'm using the built-in VS web server, Cassini). Additionally, I've tried putting breakpoints in the SessionModule but they never break. What am I missing?

    Read the article

  • Tulsa Dot Net Rocks

    - by dmccollough
    Carl Franklin & Richard Campbell of .NET Rocks are taking their show on the road and are going to make a stop in Tulsa Oklahoma on Wednesday April 28th, 2010. This event will be from 6:00 PM until 9:00 PM. This is a FREE EVENT, with FREE FOOD and FREE SWAG. They are also going to be bringing a special surprise guest speaker (It could be Scott Hanselman, Scott Guthrie, Don Box, Billy Hollis, Dan Appleman or …)   Broken Arrow North Auditorium 808 East College Street   Please visit the Tulsa Developers .NET web site for updated information as it becomes available.   Register by going to this link.

    Read the article

  • Ternary operator in VB.NET

    - by Jalpesh P. Vadgama
    We all know about Ternary operator in C#.NET. I am a big fan of ternary operator and I like to use it instead of using IF..Else. Those who don’t know about ternary operator please go through below link. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ty67wk28(v=vs.80).aspx Here you can see ternary operator returns one of the two values based on the condition. See following example. bool value = false;string output=string.Empty;//using If conditionif (value==true) output ="True";else output="False";//using tenary operatoroutput = value == true ? "True" : "False"; In the above example you can see how we produce same output with the ternary operator without using If..Else statement. Recently in one of the project I was working with VB.NET language and I was eager to know if there is a ternary operator equivalent there or not. After searching on internet I have found two ways to do it. IF operator which works for VB.NET 2008 and higher version and IIF operator which is there since VB 6.0. So let’s check same above example with both of this operators. So let’s create a console application which has following code. Module Module1 Sub Main() Dim value As Boolean = False Dim output As String = String.Empty ''Output using if else statement If value = True Then output = "True" Else output = "False" Console.WriteLine("Output Using If Loop") Console.WriteLine(output) output = If(value = True, "True", "False") Console.WriteLine("Output using If operator") Console.WriteLine(output) output = IIf(value = True, "True", "False") Console.WriteLine("Output using IIF Operator") Console.WriteLine(output) Console.ReadKey() End If End SubEnd Module As you can see in the above code I have written all three-way to condition check using If.Else statement and If operator and IIf operator. You can see that both IIF and If operator has three parameter first parameter is the condition which you need to check and then another parameter is true part of you need to put thing which you need as output when condition is ‘true’. Same way third parameter is for the false part where you need to put things which you need as output when condition as ‘false’. Now let’s run that application and following is the output as expected. That’s it. You can see all three ways are producing same output. Hope you like it. Stay tuned for more..Till then Happy Programming.

    Read the article

  • MVC Pattern, ViewModels, Location of conversion.

    - by Pino
    I've been working with ASP.Net MVC for around a year now and have created my applications in the following way. X.Web - MVC Application Contains Controller and Views X.Lib - Contains Data Access, Repositories and Services. This allows us to drop the .Lib into any application that requires it. At the moment we are using Entity Framework, the conversion from EntityO to a more specific model is done in the controller. This set-up means if a service method returns an EntityO and then the Controller will do a conversion before the data is passed to a view. I'm interested to know if I should move the conversion to the Service so that the app doesn't have Entity Objects being passed around.

    Read the article

  • MVC, when to separate controllers?

    - by Rodolfo
    I'm starting with MVC and have a newbie question. What would be the logic criteria to define what a controller should encompass? For example, say a website has a 'help' section. In there, there are several options like: 'about us', 'return instructions', 'contact us', 'employment opportunities'. Each would then be accessed like 'mysite.com/help/aboutus', 'mysite.com/help/returns', 'mysite.com/help/contactus', etc. My question is, should I have a 'help' controller that has 'about us', 'returns', 'contact us', 'employment' as actions with their respective view, or should each of those be a different controller-action-view set? What should be the line of reasoning to determine when to separate controllers?

    Read the article

  • asp.NET Dynamic Data Site and asp.NET MVC-2 site together

    - by loviji
    Hi, I have created firstly ASP.NET MVC 2. and write more functionality. After I create asp.NET Dynamic Data Site. now, when I click on run button in Visual Studio, mvc app. opened in browser as http://localhost:50062. and asp.NET Dynamic Data Site as http://localhost:58395/cms/. but i want to merge this app. in one. can I use asp.NET Dynamic Data Site and asp.NET MVC-2 at the same time?

    Read the article

  • My first .net web app - should I go straight to MVC framework (c.f. ASP.net)

    - by Greg
    Hi, I'm done some WinForms work in C# but now moving to have to develop a web application front end in .NET (C#). I have experience developing web apps in Ruby on Rails (& a little with Java with JSP pages & struts mvc). Should I jump straight to MVC framework? (as opposed to going ASP.net) That is from the point of view of future direction for Microsoft & as well ease in ramping up from myself. Or if you like, given my experience to date, what would the pros/cons for me re MVC versus ASP.net? thanks

    Read the article

  • Spring Controller's URL request mapping not working as expected

    - by Atharva
    I have created a mapping in web.xml something like this: <servlet> <servlet-name>dispatcher</servlet-name> <servlet-class>org.springframework.web.servlet.DispatcherServlet</servlet-class> <load-on-startup>1</load-on-startup> </servlet> <servlet-mapping> <servlet-name>dispatcher</servlet-name> <url-pattern>/about/*</url-pattern> </servlet-mapping> In my controller I have something like this: import org.springframework.stereotype.Controller; @Controller public class MyController{ @RequestMapping(value="/about/us", method=RequestMethod.GET) public ModelAndView myMethod1(ModelMap model){ //some code return new ModelAndView("aboutus1.jsp",model); } @RequestMapping(value="/about", method=RequestMethod.GET) public ModelAndView myMethod2(ModelMap model){ //some code return new ModelAndView("aboutus2.jsp",model); } } And my dispatcher-servlet.xml has view resolver like: <mvc:annotation-driven/> <bean id="viewResolver" class="org.springframework.web.servlet.view.InternalResourceViewResolver" p:viewClass="org.springframework.web.servlet.view.JstlView" p:prefix="/WEB-INF/jsp/" p:suffix=".jsp"/> To my surprise: request .../about/us is not reaching to myMethod1 in the controller. The browser shows 404 error. I put a logger inside the method but it isn't printing anything, meaning, its not being executed. .../about works fine! What can be the done to make .../about/us request work? Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • How to publish an ASP.NET MVC application to a free host

    - by Lirik
    Hi, I'm using a free web host (0000free) which supports ASP.NET MVC, but it uses Mono. This is the first time I deploy an MVC application, so I'm a little confused as to where I need to deploy it. I have Visual Studio 2010 and I used its Publish Feature (i.e. right click on the project name and click publish) and I tried several things: Publish method: FTP to the root folder. Publish method: FTP to the publich_html folder. Publish method: File System to the root folder. Publish method: File System to the publich_html folder. Publish method: File System to a local directory on my computer and then FTP to root and also tried the public_html folder. I went into the cPanel (control panel) to try and see if ASP.NET has to be added/enabled for my web site, but I didn't see anything there. I can't browse to Index.aspx nor can I redirect to it from index.html (as suggested from other posts on the host forum), right now I have a link from index.html to Index.aspx but it's not working either (see http://www.mydevarmy.com) I've also tried renaming Index.aspx to Default.aspx, but that doesn't work either. The search utility of the forum of the host is somewhat weak, so I use google to search their forum: http://www.google.com/search?q=publish+asp.net+site%3A0000free.com%2Fforum%2F&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a I've been reading Pro ASP.NET MVC Framework and they have a chapter about publishing, but it doesn't provide any specific information with respect to the location of publishing, this is all they say (and it's not very helpful in my case): Where Should I Put My Application? You can deploy your application to any folder on the server. When IIS first installs, it automatically creates a folder for a web site called Default Web Site at c:\Inetpub\wwwroot\, but you shouldn’t feel any obligation to put your application files there. It’s very common to host applications on a different physical drive from the operating system (e.g., in e:\websites\ example.com). It’s entirely up to you, and may be influenced by concerns such as how you plan to back up the server. Here is the exception I get when I try to view my Index.aspx page: Unrecognized attribute 'targetFramework'. (/home/devarmy/public_html/Web.config line 1) Description: HTTP 500. Error processing request. Stack Trace: System.Configuration.ConfigurationErrorsException: Unrecognized attribute 'targetFramework'. (/home/devarmy/public_html/Web.config line 1) at System.Configuration.ConfigurationElement.DeserializeElement (System.Xml.XmlReader reader, Boolean serializeCollectionKey) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at System.Configuration.ConfigurationSection.DoDeserializeSection (System.Xml.XmlReader reader) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at System.Configuration.ConfigurationSection.DeserializeSection (System.Xml.XmlReader reader) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at System.Configuration.Configuration.GetSectionInstance (System.Configuration.SectionInfo config, Boolean createDefaultInstance) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at System.Configuration.ConfigurationSectionCollection.get_Item (System.String name) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at System.Configuration.Configuration.GetSection (System.String path) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at System.Web.Configuration.WebConfigurationManager.GetSection (System.String sectionName, System.String path, System.Web.HttpContext context) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at System.Web.Configuration.WebConfigurationManager.GetSection (System.String sectionName, System.String path) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at System.Web.Configuration.WebConfigurationManager.GetWebApplicationSection (System.String sectionName) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at System.Web.Compilation.BuildManager.get_CompilationConfig () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at System.Web.Compilation.BuildManager.Build (System.Web.VirtualPath vp) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at System.Web.Compilation.BuildManager.GetCompiledType (System.Web.VirtualPath virtualPath) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at System.Web.Compilation.BuildManager.GetCompiledType (System.String virtualPath) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at System.Web.HttpApplicationFactory.InitType (System.Web.HttpContext context) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0

    Read the article

  • asp.net mvc custom model binder

    - by mike
    pleas help guys, my custom model binder which has been working perfectly has starting giving me errors details below An item with the same key has already been added. Description: An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code. Exception Details: System.ArgumentException: An item with the same key has already been added. Source Error: Line 31: { Line 32: string key = bindingContext.ModelName; Line 33: var doc = base.BindModel(controllerContext, bindingContext) as Document; Line 34: Line 35: // DoBasicValidation(bindingContext, doc); Source File: C:\Users\Bich Vu\Documents\Visual Studio 2008\Projects\PitchPortal\PitchPortal.Web\Binders\DocumentModelBinder.cs Line: 33 Stack Trace: [ArgumentException: An item with the same key has already been added.] System.ThrowHelper.ThrowArgumentException(ExceptionResource resource) +51 System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary2.Insert(TKey key, TValue value, Boolean add) +7462172 System.Linq.Enumerable.ToDictionary(IEnumerable1 source, Func2 keySelector, Func2 elementSelector, IEqualityComparer1 comparer) +270 System.Linq.Enumerable.ToDictionary(IEnumerable1 source, Func2 keySelector, IEqualityComparer1 comparer) +102 System.Web.Mvc.ModelBindingContext.get_PropertyMetadata() +157 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultModelBinder.BindProperty(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext, PropertyDescriptor propertyDescriptor) +158 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultModelBinder.BindProperties(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext) +90 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultModelBinder.BindComplexElementalModel(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext, Object model) +50 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultModelBinder.BindComplexModel(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext) +1048 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultModelBinder.BindModel(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext) +280 PitchPortal.Web.Binders.documentModelBinder.BindModel(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext) in C:\Users\Bich Vu\Documents\Visual Studio 2008\Projects\PitchPortal\PitchPortal.Web\Binders\DocumentModelBinder.cs:33 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.GetParameterValue(ControllerContext controllerContext, ParameterDescriptor parameterDescriptor) +257 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.GetParameterValues(ControllerContext controllerContext, ActionDescriptor actionDescriptor) +109 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeAction(ControllerContext controllerContext, String actionName) +314 System.Web.Mvc.Controller.ExecuteCore() +105 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerBase.Execute(RequestContext requestContext) +39 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerBase.System.Web.Mvc.IController.Execute(RequestContext requestContext) +7 System.Web.Mvc.<c_DisplayClass8.b_4() +34 System.Web.Mvc.Async.<c_DisplayClass1.b_0() +21 System.Web.Mvc.Async.<c_DisplayClass81.b_7(IAsyncResult _) +12 System.Web.Mvc.Async.WrappedAsyncResult1.End() +59 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.EndProcessRequest(IAsyncResult asyncResult) +44 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.System.Web.IHttpAsyncHandler.EndProcessRequest(IAsyncResult result) +7 System.Web.CallHandlerExecutionStep.System.Web.HttpApplication.IExecutionStep.Execute() +8677678 System.Web.HttpApplication.ExecuteStep(IExecutionStep step, Boolean& completedSynchronously) +155 any ideas guys? Thanks

    Read the article

  • asp.net mvc custom model binder

    - by mike
    pleas help guys, my custom model binder which has been working perfectly has starting giving me errors details below An item with the same key has already been added. Description: An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code. Exception Details: System.ArgumentException: An item with the same key has already been added. Source Error: Line 31: { Line 32: string key = bindingContext.ModelName; Line 33: var doc = base.BindModel(controllerContext, bindingContext) as Document; Line 34: Line 35: // DoBasicValidation(bindingContext, doc); Source File: C:\Users\Bich Vu\Documents\Visual Studio 2008\Projects\PitchPortal\PitchPortal.Web\Binders\DocumentModelBinder.cs Line: 33 Stack Trace: [ArgumentException: An item with the same key has already been added.] System.ThrowHelper.ThrowArgumentException(ExceptionResource resource) +51 System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary2.Insert(TKey key, TValue value, Boolean add) +7462172 System.Linq.Enumerable.ToDictionary(IEnumerable1 source, Func2 keySelector, Func2 elementSelector, IEqualityComparer1 comparer) +270 System.Linq.Enumerable.ToDictionary(IEnumerable1 source, Func2 keySelector, IEqualityComparer1 comparer) +102 System.Web.Mvc.ModelBindingContext.get_PropertyMetadata() +157 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultModelBinder.BindProperty(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext, PropertyDescriptor propertyDescriptor) +158 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultModelBinder.BindProperties(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext) +90 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultModelBinder.BindComplexElementalModel(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext, Object model) +50 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultModelBinder.BindComplexModel(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext) +1048 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultModelBinder.BindModel(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext) +280 PitchPortal.Web.Binders.documentModelBinder.BindModel(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext) in C:\Users\Bich Vu\Documents\Visual Studio 2008\Projects\PitchPortal\PitchPortal.Web\Binders\DocumentModelBinder.cs:33 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.GetParameterValue(ControllerContext controllerContext, ParameterDescriptor parameterDescriptor) +257 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.GetParameterValues(ControllerContext controllerContext, ActionDescriptor actionDescriptor) +109 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeAction(ControllerContext controllerContext, String actionName) +314 System.Web.Mvc.Controller.ExecuteCore() +105 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerBase.Execute(RequestContext requestContext) +39 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerBase.System.Web.Mvc.IController.Execute(RequestContext requestContext) +7 System.Web.Mvc.<c_DisplayClass8.b_4() +34 System.Web.Mvc.Async.<c_DisplayClass1.b_0() +21 System.Web.Mvc.Async.<c__DisplayClass81.<BeginSynchronous>b__7(IAsyncResult _) +12 System.Web.Mvc.Async.WrappedAsyncResult1.End() +59 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.EndProcessRequest(IAsyncResult asyncResult) +44 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.System.Web.IHttpAsyncHandler.EndProcessRequest(IAsyncResult result) +7 System.Web.CallHandlerExecutionStep.System.Web.HttpApplication.IExecutionStep.Execute() +8677678 System.Web.HttpApplication.ExecuteStep(IExecutionStep step, Boolean& completedSynchronously) +155 any ideas guys? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Can I run asp.net mvc 1 on .net 4?

    - by Jenea
    I have a asp.net mvc site that references a couple of libraries. Recently I discovered that it is necessary to migrate those dlls to .net 4 (I mean compile them for .net 4). Can I run asp.net mvc 1 on .net 4. Migration to asp.net mvc 2 is postponed because of the removal of response.WriteSubstitution(...) method.

    Read the article

  • C#.NET vs VB.NET, Which language is better?

    Features I cannot say any language good or bad as long as it's compiler can produce MSIL can run under .NET CLR. If someone says C# has more futures, you can understand that those new features are of C# compiler but not .NET, because if C# has a specific future then CLR cannot understand them. So the new features of C# will have to convert to the code understood by CLR eventually. that means the new features are developed for C# compiler basically to facilitates the developer to write their code in better way. so that means no difference in feature list between C# and VB.NET if you think in CLR perspective. Ease of writing Code I feel writing code in C# is easy, because my background is C and C++, Java, syntaxes very are similar. I assume most developers feel the same. Readability But some people say VB.NET code most readable for the members who are from non technical background, because keywords are generally in English rather special charectors. No of Projects in Market I assume 80 percent of market uses C# in their .NET development. for example in my company many projects are there .nET and all are using C#. Productivity & Experience though the feature list is same, generally developers wants to write code in their familiar languages. because it increase the productivity. Hope this helps to choose the language which suits for you. span.fullpost {display:none;}

    Read the article

  • Anti-Forgery Request in ASP.NET MVC and AJAX

    - by Dixin
    Background To secure websites from cross-site request forgery (CSRF, or XSRF) attack, ASP.NET MVC provides an excellent mechanism: The server prints tokens to cookie and inside the form; When the form is submitted to server, token in cookie and token inside the form are sent by the HTTP request; Server validates the tokens. To print tokens to browser, just invoke HtmlHelper.AntiForgeryToken():<% using (Html.BeginForm()) { %> <%: this.Html.AntiForgeryToken(Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)%> <%-- Other fields. --%> <input type="submit" value="Submit" /> <% } %> which writes to token to the form:<form action="..." method="post"> <input name="__RequestVerificationToken" type="hidden" value="J56khgCvbE3bVcsCSZkNVuH9Cclm9SSIT/ywruFsXEgmV8CL2eW5C/gGsQUf/YuP" /> <!-- Other fields. --> <input type="submit" value="Submit" /> </form> and the cookie: __RequestVerificationToken_Lw__=J56khgCvbE3bVcsCSZkNVuH9Cclm9SSIT/ywruFsXEgmV8CL2eW5C/gGsQUf/YuP When the above form is submitted, they are both sent to server. [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute is used to specify the controllers or actions to validate them:[HttpPost] [ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public ActionResult Action(/* ... */) { // ... } This is very productive for form scenarios. But recently, when resolving security vulnerabilities for Web products, I encountered 2 problems: It is expected to add [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] to each controller, but actually I have to add it for each POST actions, which is a little crazy; After anti-forgery validation is turned on for server side, AJAX POST requests will consistently fail. Specify validation on controller (not on each action) Problem For the first problem, usually a controller contains actions for both HTTP GET and HTTP POST requests, and usually validations are expected for HTTP POST requests. So, if the [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] is declared on the controller, the HTTP GET requests become always invalid:[ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public class SomeController : Controller { [HttpGet] public ActionResult Index() // Index page cannot work at all. { // ... } [HttpPost] public ActionResult PostAction1(/* ... */) { // ... } [HttpPost] public ActionResult PostAction2(/* ... */) { // ... } // ... } If user sends a HTTP GET request from a link: http://Site/Some/Index, validation definitely fails, because no token is provided. So the result is, [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute must be distributed to each HTTP POST action in the application:public class SomeController : Controller { [HttpGet] public ActionResult Index() // Works. { // ... } [HttpPost] [ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public ActionResult PostAction1(/* ... */) { // ... } [HttpPost] [ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public ActionResult PostAction2(/* ... */) { // ... } // ... } Solution To avoid a large number of [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attributes (one attribute for one HTTP POST action), I created a wrapper class of ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute, where HTTP verbs can be specified:[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Class | AttributeTargets.Method, AllowMultiple = false, Inherited = true)] public class ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute : FilterAttribute, IAuthorizationFilter { private readonly ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute _validator; private readonly AcceptVerbsAttribute _verbs; public ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute(HttpVerbs verbs) : this(verbs, null) { } public ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute(HttpVerbs verbs, string salt) { this._verbs = new AcceptVerbsAttribute(verbs); this._validator = new ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute() { Salt = salt }; } public void OnAuthorization(AuthorizationContext filterContext) { string httpMethodOverride = filterContext.HttpContext.Request.GetHttpMethodOverride(); if (this._verbs.Verbs.Contains(httpMethodOverride, StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase)) { this._validator.OnAuthorization(filterContext); } } } When this attribute is declared on controller, only HTTP requests with the specified verbs are validated:[ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapper(HttpVerbs.Post, Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public class SomeController : Controller { // Actions for HTTP GET requests are not affected. // Only HTTP POST requests are validated. } Now one single attribute on controller turns on validation for all HTTP POST actions. Submit token via AJAX Problem For AJAX scenarios, when request is sent by JavaScript instead of form:$.post(url, { productName: "Tofu", categoryId: 1 // Token is not posted. }, callback); This kind of AJAX POST requests will always be invalid, because server side code cannot see the token in the posted data. Solution The token must be printed to browser then submitted back to server. So first of all, HtmlHelper.AntiForgeryToken() must be called in the page where the AJAX POST will be sent. Then jQuery must find the printed token in the page, and post it:$.post(url, { productName: "Tofu", categoryId: 1, __RequestVerificationToken: getToken() // Token is posted. }, callback); To be reusable, this can be encapsulated in a tiny jQuery plugin:(function ($) { $.getAntiForgeryToken = function () { // HtmlHelper.AntiForgeryToken() must be invoked to print the token. return $("input[type='hidden'][name='__RequestVerificationToken']").val(); }; var addToken = function (data) { // Converts data if not already a string. if (data && typeof data !== "string") { data = $.param(data); } data = data ? data + "&" : ""; return data + "__RequestVerificationToken=" + encodeURIComponent($.getAntiForgeryToken()); }; $.postAntiForgery = function (url, data, callback, type) { return $.post(url, addToken(data), callback, type); }; $.ajaxAntiForgery = function (settings) { settings.data = addToken(settings.data); return $.ajax(settings); }; })(jQuery); Then in the application just replace $.post() invocation with $.postAntiForgery(), and replace $.ajax() instead of $.ajaxAntiForgery():$.postAntiForgery(url, { productName: "Tofu", categoryId: 1 }, callback); // Token is posted. This solution looks hard coded and stupid. If you have more elegant solution, please do tell me.

    Read the article

  • C#.NET vs VB.NET, Which language is better?

    Features I cannot say any language good or bad as long as it's compiler can produce MSIL can run under .NET CLR. If someone says C# has more futures, you can understand that those new features are of C# compiler but not .NET, because if C# has a specific future then CLR cannot understand them. So the new features of C# will have to convert to the code understood by CLR eventually. that means the new features are developed for C# compiler basically to facilitates the developer to write their code in better way. so that means no difference in feature list between C# and VB.NET if you think in CLR perspective. Ease of writing Code I feel writing code in C# is easy, because my background is C and C++, Java, syntaxes very are similar. I assume most developers feel the same. Readability But some people say VB.NET code most readable for the members who are from non technical background, because keywords are generally in English rather special charectors. No of Projects in Market I assume 80 percent of market uses C# in their .NET development. for example in my company many projects are there .nET and all are using C#. Productivity & Experience though the feature list is same, generally developers wants to write code in their familiar languages. because it increase the productivity. Hope this helps to choose the language which suits for you. span.fullpost {display:none;}

    Read the article

  • Server Controls in ASP.NET MVC without ViewState

    - by imran_ku07
      Introduction :           ASP.NET Web Forms provides a development environment just like GUI or windows application and try to hide statelessness nature of HTTP protocol. For accomplishing this target, Web Forms uses ViewState (a hidden field) to remove the gap between HTTP statelessness and GUI applications. But the problem with this technique is that ViewState size which grows quickly and also go back and forth with every request, as a result it will degrade application performance. In this article i will try to use existing ASP.NET server controls without ViewState.   Description :           When you add a server control which needs viewstate, in the presentation view in ASP.NET MVC application without a form tag, for example,            <asp:TextBox ID="TextBox1" runat="server"></asp:TextBox>            It will shows the following exception,            Control 'TextBox1' of type 'TextBox' must be placed inside a form tag with runat=server             When you place this textbox inside a form tag with runat=server, this will add the following ViewState even when you disable ViewState by using EnableViewState="false"            <input type="hidden" value="/wEPDwUJMjgzMDgzOTgzZGQ6u9CwikhHEW39ObrHyLTPFSboPA==" id="__VIEWSTATE" name="__VIEWSTATE"/>             The solution to this problem is to use the RenderControl method of server control which is simply renders HTML without any ViewState hidden field.         <% TextBox txt = new TextBox();          txt.Text = "abc";          StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();          System.IO.StringWriter textwriter = new System.IO.StringWriter(sb);          HtmlTextWriter htmlwriter = new HtmlTextWriter(textwriter);          txt.RenderControl(htmlwriter);  %>        <%= sb.ToString() %>             This will render <input type="text" > without any View State. This technique become very useful when you are using rich server controls like GridView. For example, let's say you have List of Recalls in Model.Recalls, then you will show your tabular data as,     <%  GridView gv = new GridView();          gv.AutoGenerateColumns = true;          gv.DataSource = Model.Recalls;          gv.DataBind();         StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();         System.IO.StringWriter textwriter = new System.IO.StringWriter(sb);         HtmlTextWriter htmlwriter = new HtmlTextWriter(textwriter);         gv.RenderControl(htmlwriter);%>            <%= sb.ToString() %>             This code might looks odd in your presentation view. A more better approach is to create a HTML Helper method which contains the above code. Summary :        In some cases you might needs to use existing ASP.NET Web Forms server controls but also dislikes ViewState. In this article i try to solve this gap by using the RenderControl method of Control class. Hopefully you enjoyed and become ready to create HTML helpers for many of the existing server controls.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC Postbacks and HtmlHelper Controls ignoring Model Changes

    - by Rick Strahl
    So here's a binding behavior in ASP.NET MVC that I didn't really get until today: HtmlHelpers controls (like .TextBoxFor() etc.) don't bind to model values on Postback, but rather get their value directly out of the POST buffer from ModelState. Effectively it looks like you can't change the display value of a control via model value updates on a Postback operation. To demonstrate here's an example. I have a small section in a document where I display an editable email address: This is what the form displays on a GET operation and as expected I get the email value displayed in both the textbox and plain value display below, which reflects the value in the mode. I added a plain text value to demonstrate the model value compared to what's rendered in the textbox. The relevant markup is the email address which needs to be manipulated via the model in the Controller code. Here's the Razor markup: <div class="fieldcontainer"> <label> Email: &nbsp; <small>(username and <a href="http://gravatar.com">Gravatar</a> image)</small> </label> <div> @Html.TextBoxFor( mod=> mod.User.Email, new {type="email",@class="inputfield"}) @Model.User.Email </div> </div>   So, I have this form and the user can change their email address. On postback the Post controller code then asks the business layer whether the change is allowed. If it's not I want to reset the email address back to the old value which exists in the database and was previously store. The obvious thing to do would be to modify the model. Here's the Controller logic block that deals with that:// did user change email? if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(oldEmail) && user.Email != oldEmail) { if (userBus.DoesEmailExist(user.Email)) { userBus.ValidationErrors.Add("New email address exists already. Please…"); user.Email = oldEmail; } else // allow email change but require verification by forcing a login user.IsVerified = false; }… model.user = user; return View(model); The logic is straight forward - if the new email address is not valid because it already exists I don't want to display the new email address the user entered, but rather the old one. To do this I change the value on the model which effectively does this:model.user.Email = oldEmail; return View(model); So when I press the Save button after entering in my new email address ([email protected]) here's what comes back in the rendered view: Notice that the textbox value and the raw displayed model value are different. The TextBox displays the POST value, the raw value displays the actual model value which are different. This means that MVC renders the textbox value from the POST data rather than from the view data when an Http POST is active. Now I don't know about you but this is not the behavior I expected - initially. This behavior effectively means that I cannot modify the contents of the textbox from the Controller code if using HtmlHelpers for binding. Updating the model for display purposes in a POST has in effect - no effect. (Apr. 25, 2012 - edited the post heavily based on comments and more experimentation) What should the behavior be? After getting quite a few comments on this post I quickly realized that the behavior I described above is actually the behavior you'd want in 99% of the binding scenarios. You do want to get the POST values back into your input controls at all times, so that the data displayed on a form for the user matches what they typed. So if an error occurs, the error doesn't mysteriously disappear getting replaced either with a default value or some value that you changed on the model on your own. Makes sense. Still it is a little non-obvious because the way you create the UI elements with MVC, it certainly looks like your are binding to the model value:@Html.TextBoxFor( mod=> mod.User.Email, new {type="email",@class="inputfield",required="required" }) and so unless one understands a little bit about how the model binder works this is easy to trip up. At least it was for me. Even though I'm telling the control which model value to bind to, that model value is only used initially on GET operations. After that ModelState/POST values provide the display value. Workarounds The default behavior should be fine for 99% of binding scenarios. But if you do need fix up values based on your model rather than the default POST values, there are a number of ways that you can work around this. Initially when I ran into this, I couldn't figure out how to set the value using code and so the simplest solution to me was simply to not use the MVC Html Helper for the specific control and explicitly bind the model via HTML markup and @Razor expression: <input type="text" name="User.Email" id="User_Email" value="@Model.User.Email" /> And this produces the right result. This is easy enough to create, but feels a little out of place when using the @Html helpers for everything else. As you can see by the difference in the name and id values, you also are forced to remember the naming conventions that MVC imposes in order for ModelBinding to work properly which is a pain to remember and set manually (name is the same as the property with . syntax, id replaces dots with underlines). Use the ModelState Some of my original confusion came because I didn't understand how the model binder works. The model binder basically maintains ModelState on a postback, which holds a value and binding errors for each of the Post back value submitted on the page that can be mapped to the model. In other words there's one ModelState entry for each bound property of the model. Each ModelState entry contains a value property that holds AttemptedValue and RawValue properties. The AttemptedValue is essentially the POST value retrieved from the form. The RawValue is the value that the model holds. When MVC binds controls like @Html.TextBoxFor() or @Html.TextBox(), it always binds values on a GET operation. On a POST operation however, it'll always used the AttemptedValue to display the control. MVC binds using the ModelState on a POST operation, not the model's value. So, if you want the behavior that I was expecting originally you can actually get it by clearing the ModelState in the controller code:ModelState.Clear(); This clears out all the captured ModelState values, and effectively binds to the model. Note this will produce very similar results - in fact if there are no binding errors you see exactly the same behavior as if binding from ModelState, because the model has been updated from the ModelState already and binding to the updated values most likely produces the same values you would get with POST back values. The big difference though is that any values that couldn't bind - like say putting a string into a numeric field - will now not display back the value the user typed, but the default field value or whatever you changed the model value to. This is the behavior I was actually expecting previously. But - clearing out all values might be a bit heavy handed. You might want to fix up one or two values in a model but rarely would you want the entire model to update from the model. So, you can also clear out individual values on an as needed basis:if (userBus.DoesEmailExist(user.Email)) { userBus.ValidationErrors.Add("New email address exists already. Please…"); user.Email = oldEmail; ModelState.Remove("User.Email"); } This allows you to remove a single value from the ModelState and effectively allows you to replace that value for display from the model. Why? While researching this I came across a post from Microsoft's Brad Wilson who describes the default binding behavior best in a forum post: The reason we use the posted value for editors rather than the model value is that the model may not be able to contain the value that the user typed. Imagine in your "int" editor the user had typed "dog". You want to display an error message which says "dog is not valid", and leave "dog" in the editor field. However, your model is an int: there's no way it can store "dog". So we keep the old value. If you don't want the old values in the editor, clear out the Model State. That's where the old value is stored and pulled from the HTML helpers. There you have it. It's not the most intuitive behavior, but in hindsight this behavior does make some sense even if at first glance it looks like you should be able to update values from the model. The solution of clearing ModelState works and is a reasonable one but you have to know about some of the innards of ModelState and how it actually works to figure that out.© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in ASP.NET  MVC   Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC ModelCopier

    - by shiju
     In my earlier post ViewModel patten and AutoMapper in ASP.NET MVC application, We have discussed the need for  View Model objects and how to map values between View Model objects and Domain model objects using AutoMapper. ASP.NET MVC futures assembly provides a static class ModelCopier that can also use for copying values between View Model objects and Domain model objects. ModelCopier class has two static methods - CopyCollection and CopyModel.CopyCollection method would copy values between two collection objects and CopyModel would copy values between two model objects. <PRE class="c#" name="code"> var expense=new Expense(); ModelCopier.CopyModel(expenseViewModel, expense);</PRE>The above code copying values from expenseViewModel object to  expense object.                For simple mapping between model objects, you can use ModelCopier but for complex scenarios, I highly recommending to using AutoMapper for mapping between model objects.

    Read the article

  • LLBLGen Pro and JSON serialization

    - by FransBouma
    I accidentally removed a reply from my previous blogpost, and as this blog-engine here at weblogs.asp.net is apparently falling apart, I can't re-add it as it thought it would be wise to disable comment controls on all posts, except new ones. So I'll post the reply here as a quote and reply on it. 'Steven' asks: What would the future be for LLBLGen Pro to support JSON for serialization? Would it be worth the effort for a LLBLGenPro user to bother creating some code templates to produce additional JSON serializable classes? Or just create some basic POCO classes which could be used for exchange of client/server data and use DTO to map these back to LLBGenPro ones? If I understand the work around, it is at the expense of losing xml serialization. Well, as described in the previous post, to enable JSON serialization, you can do that with a couple of lines and some attribute assignments. However, indeed, the attributes might make the XML serialization not working, as described in the previous blogpost. This is the case if the service you're using serializes objects using the DataContract serializer: this serializer will give up to serialize the entity objects to XML as the entity objects implement IXmlSerializable and this is a no-go area for the DataContract serializer. However, if your service doesn't use a DataContract serializer, or you serialize the objects manually to Xml using an xml serializer, you're fine. When you want to switch to Xml serializing again, instead of JSON in WebApi, and you have decorated the entity classes with the data-contract attributes, you can switch off the DataContract serializer, by setting a global configuration setting: var xml = GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.Formatters.XmlFormatter; xml.UseXmlSerializer = true; This will make the WebApi use the XmlSerializer, and run the normal IXmlSerializable interface implementation.

    Read the article

  • Validating Data Using Data Annotation Attributes in ASP.NET MVC

    - by bipinjoshi
    The data entered by the end user in various form fields must be validated before it is saved in the database. Developers often use validation HTML helpers provided by ASP.NET MVC to perform the input validations. Additionally, you can also use data annotation attributes from the System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations namespace to perform validations at the model level. Data annotation attributes are attached to the properties of the model class and enforce some validation criteria. They are capable of performing validation on the server side as well as on the client side. This article discusses the basics of using these attributes in an ASP.NET MVC application.http://www.bipinjoshi.net/articles/0a53f05f-b58c-47b1-a544-f032f5cfca58.aspx       

    Read the article

  • Implementing google dashboard type interface in asp.net

    - by Sam_Cogan
    I'm looking at implementing a Google IG type dashboard in a .net app. There are a number of options I've found to do this, and i'm trying to establish what is going to be the best to use, in terms of speed, versatility etc. So far the options I am looking at are either to use asp.net webparts and .net Ajax, this would make it quicker to build, but I'm concerned this is going to make the application bulky and slow, or using JQuery, and either .net MVC or Webforms, to custom build an interface. Does anyone have any thoughts on what the best option may be, or any options I may have missed? All I want to do here is to allow users to customise a dashboard with a number of components (which will be user controls). I do also have access to Telerik controls, but I'm not sure if they would be any use here.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >