Search Results

Search found 64605 results on 2585 pages for 'net questions'.

Page 125/2585 | < Previous Page | 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132  | Next Page >

  • How to acheieve this kind of behaviour in asp.net mvc

    - by kumar
    Hello Friends,, I have this two Action result methods. public ActionResult GetStudentInfo(StudentBE s) { return PartialView("editStudent", s); } public ActionResult GenericList() { StudentBE codes = new StudentBE(); codes.lookcodes= GetStudentCodes(new string[] { "A", "B", "C, "D", "E" }); return PartialView(codes); } // Lookcodes display dropdownlist boxes in the GeneridList view.. In genericList view I hvae beginForm.. <% using (Html.BeginForm("Updatestudent", "expense", FormMethod.Post, new { @id = "id" })) { %> <% } %> so My updatestudent method is [HttpPost] public JsonResult Updatestudent(StudentBE e) { var status = common.Update(e.student); } } return Json(status.ToString()); } Here is my problem.. the GetStudentInfo Actionresult is having each student information.. in UpdateStudent method Update Method calls the DB calls for stored procedure to update each user information now to update each user I need to call GetstudentInfo each time to get student information to update..? how to call GetStudentInfo method here to get studentinformation? student informatin may be multiple that is more than one student informaton... can anybody help me out.. thanks

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET Custom Control - Template Allowing Literal Content

    - by Bob Fincheimer
    I want my User Control to be able to have Literal Content inside of it. For Example: <fc:Text runat="server">Please enter your login information:</fc:Text> Currently the code for my user control is: <ParseChildren(True, "Content")> _ Partial Public Class ctrFormText Inherits FormControl Private _content As ArrayList <PersistenceMode(PersistenceMode.InnerDefaultProperty), _ DesignerSerializationVisibility(DesignerSerializationVisibility.Content), _ TemplateInstance(TemplateInstance.Single)> _ Public Property Content() As ArrayList Get If _content Is Nothing Then Return New ArrayList End If Return _content End Get Set(ByVal value As ArrayList) _content = value End Set End Property Protected Overrides Sub CreateChildControls() If _content IsNot Nothing Then ctrChildren.Controls.Clear() For Each i As Control In _content ctrChildren.Controls.Add(i) Next End If MyBase.CreateChildControls() End Sub End Class And when I put text inside this control (like above) i get this error: Parser Error Message: Literal content ('Please enter your login information to access CKMS:') is not allowed within a 'System.Collections.ArrayList'. This control could have other content than just the text, so making the Content property an attribute will not solve my problem. I found in some places that I need to implement a ControlBuilder Class, along with another class that implements IParserAccessor. Anyway I just want my default "Content" property to have all types of controls allowed in it, both literal and actual controls.

    Read the article

  • How to remove the link if value is 0 using asp.net mvc

    - by kumar
    i have this code.. <table class="dashboard-table"> <thead> <tr> <th>&nbsp;</th> <th>Worked</th> </tr> </thead> <% foreach (var e in Model.ExceptionsByType) { %> <tr> <td> <%=Html.ActionLink(e.ExceptionTypeName, "VirtualScrollingDataRequested", Model.exceptionCategory.GetControllerName(), new { C_EXCPT_TYPE = e.ExceptionTypeID, GUI_SPEC_STAT_DSPL = 2, C_EXCPT_CATG = Model.exceptionCategory.Id, @ASSET_CLASS = string.Empty, @INST_MNEM = string.Empty, @_lock = "ALL" }, new { @title = e.BuildGridTitle(2, e.ExceptionTypeName) })%> </td> <td class="number"> <%=e.WorkedExceptions %> </td> </tr> <% } %> </table> e.WorkedExceptions is the count of exceptions.. I need to to the condition here if the e.workedexceptions == 0 I need to remove the link? please can any body hlep me out? thanks

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC 2 model properties binding order

    - by bniwredyc
    Is there a way to change order in which the default binder binds property values of model? For example I have model class A: class A { public string A1 {get; set;} public string A2 {get; set;} } and action DoSomethig: public ActionResult DoSomething(A model) { ... } I want that A2 property has been bound before the A1 property. Is it possible? Or I need to write custom binder?

    Read the article

  • Asp.net mvc html melper

    - by tom
    Hi there Ive got this function as a html helper which should write a javascript function onto the page, I then call this in the masterpage like this <%Html.RenderBaseUrlScript(); % My problem is that the script never seems to be written to the page, I search in the source and cannot see it anywhere, I have tried moving this around from the head to the body of the html masterpage, Im really confused as to why this is not workung, please help public static string RenderBaseUrlScript(this HtmlHelper helper) { return string.Format("<script type='text/javascript'> $.url=function(url){{return '{0}'+url;}}", GetBaseUri()); }

    Read the article

  • Multiple versions of .NET

    - by grawity
    In my WinXP box, I have these "programs" installed: Microsoft .NET Framework 1.1 Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 SP2 Microsoft .NET Framework 3.0 SP2 Microsoft .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 Do I need all four versions? Can software compiled on .NET 1.1 run on a 3.5 runtime?

    Read the article

  • Global Import/using Aliasing in .NET

    - by Josh Stodola
    Using import aliasing in a single class, we can reference class library namespaces by assigning our own custom alias like this: ' VB Imports Db = Company.Lib.Data.Objects // C# using Db = Company.Lib.Data.Objects; And then we are able to reference the classes inside of Company.Lib.Data.Objects by using the Db alias that we assigned. Is it possible to do this at the global level so that the alias is applied to the entire solution instead of the given file? Currently, we are working with web applications, so I was hoping we could add something to web.config, but I am also interested in whether or not this is possible with windows forms, console apps, and/or class libraries.

    Read the article

  • Start Line with (New... in VB.net

    - by pedro_cesar
    Hello; Why can't I start a line using a parenthesis followed by the keyword new?? For example: (New <custom_obj>).foo(var) In that case is obvious that I'm trying to avoid creating a named instance of the the <custom_obj> because I know that I'll only be using it at that sentence. Note that actually creating a named instance is not a problem for me... I just wanna know the reason why this is not possible.

    Read the article

  • 'Caching' a large table in ASP.NET

    - by TheNewGuy
    I understand that each page refresh, especially in 'AjaxLand', causes my back-end/code-behind class to be called from scratch... This is a problem because my class (which is a member object in System.Web.UI.Page) contains A LOT of data that it sources from a database. So now every page refresh in AjaxLand is causing me to making large backend DB calls, rather than just to reuse a class object from memory. Any fix for this? Is this where session variables come into play? Are session variables the only option I have to retain an object in memory that is linked to a single-user and a single-session instance?

    Read the article

  • Removing the XML Formatter from ASP.NET Web API Applications

    - by Rick Strahl
    ASP.NET Web API's default output format is supposed to be JSON, but when I access my Web APIs using the browser address bar I'm always seeing an XML result instead. When working on AJAX application I like to test many of my AJAX APIs with the browser while working on them. While I can't debug all requests this way, GET requests are easy to test in the browser especially if you have JSON viewing options set up in your various browsers. If I preview a Web API request in most browsers I get an XML response like this: Why is that? Web API checks the HTTP Accept headers of a request to determine what type of output it should return by looking for content typed that it has formatters registered for. This automatic negotiation is one of the great features of Web API because it makes it easy and transparent to request different kinds of output from the server. In the case of browsers it turns out that most send Accept headers that look like this (Chrome in this case): Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8 Web API inspects the entire list of headers from left to right (plus the quality/priority flag q=) and tries to find a media type that matches its list of supported media types in the list of formatters registered. In this case it matches application/xml to the Xml formatter and so that's what gets returned and displayed. To verify that Web API indeed defaults to JSON output by default you can open the request in Fiddler and pop it into the Request Composer, remove the application/xml header and see that the output returned comes back in JSON instead. An accept header like this: Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,*/*;q=0.9 or leaving the Accept header out altogether should give you a JSON response. Interestingly enough Internet Explorer 9 also displays JSON because it doesn't include an application/xml Accept header: Accept: text/html, application/xhtml+xml, */* which for once actually seems more sensible. Removing the XML Formatter We can't easily change the browser Accept headers (actually you can by delving into the config but it's a bit of a hassle), so can we change the behavior on the server? When working on AJAX applications I tend to not be interested in XML results and I always want to see JSON results at least during development. Web API uses a collection of formatters and you can go through this list and remove the ones you don't want to use - in this case the XmlMediaTypeFormatter. To do this you can work with the HttpConfiguration object and the static GlobalConfiguration object used to configure it: protected void Application_Start(object sender, EventArgs e) { // Action based routing (used for RPC calls) RouteTable.Routes.MapHttpRoute( name: "StockApi", routeTemplate: "stocks/{action}/{symbol}", defaults: new { symbol = RouteParameter.Optional, controller = "StockApi" } ); // WebApi Configuration to hook up formatters and message handlers RegisterApis(GlobalConfiguration.Configuration); } public static void RegisterApis(HttpConfiguration config) { // remove default Xml handler var matches = config.Formatters .Where(f = f.SupportedMediaTypes .Where(m = m.MediaType.ToString() == "application/xml" || m.MediaType.ToString() == "text/xml") .Count() 0) .ToList() ; foreach (var match in matches) config.Formatters.Remove(match); } } That LINQ code is quite a mouthful of nested collections, but it does the trick to remove the formatter based on the content type. You can also look for the specific formatter (XmlMediatTypeFormatter) by its type name which is simpler, but it's better to search for the supported types as this will work even if there are other custom formatters added. Once removed, now the browser request results in a JSON response: It's a simple solution to a small debugging task that's made my life easier. Maybe you find it useful too…© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in Web Api  ASP.NET   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

  • Pure Front end JavaScript with Web API versus MVC views with ajax

    - by eyeballpaul
    This was more a discussion for what peoples thoughts are these days on how to split a web application. I am used to creating an MVC application with all its views and controllers. I would normally create a full view and pass this back to the browser on a full page request, unless there were specific areas that I did not want to populate straight away and would then use DOM page load events to call the server to load other areas using AJAX. Also, when it came to partial page refreshing, I would call an MVC action method which would return the HTML fragment which I could then use to populate parts of the page. This would be for areas that I did not want to slow down initial page load, or areas that fitted better with AJAX calls. One example would be for table paging. If you want to move on to the next page, I would prefer it if an AJAX call got that info rather than using a full page refresh. But the AJAX call would still return an HTML fragment. My question is. Are my thoughts on this archaic because I come from a .net background rather than a pure front end background? An intelligent front end developer that I work with, prefers to do more or less nothing in the MVC views, and would rather do everything on the front end. Right down to web API calls populating the page. So that rather than calling an MVC action method, which returns HTML, he would prefer to return a standard object and use javascript to create all the elements of the page. The front end developer way means that any benefits that I normally get with MVC model validation, including client side validation, would be gone. It also means that any benefits that I get with creating the views, with strongly typed html templates etc would be gone. I believe this would mean I would need to write the same validation for front end and back end validation. The javascript would also need to have lots of methods for creating all the different parts of the DOM. For example, when adding a new row to a table, I would normally use the MVC partial view for creating the row, and then return this as part of the AJAX call, which then gets injected into the table. By using a pure front end way, the javascript would would take in an object (for, say, a product) for the row from the api call, and then create a row from that object. Creating each individual part of the table row. The website in question will have lots of different areas, from administration, forms, product searching etc. A website that I don't think requires to be architected in a single page application way. What are everyone's thoughts on this? I am interested to hear from front end devs and back end devs.

    Read the article

  • Questions about Microsoft's new Cloud certification

    - by makerofthings7
    I'm evaluating taking the cloud certification exams from Microsoft, and have a few questions How highly do you think employers will value this exam? What job roles would require this cert? In your personal experience, how would this certification be weighed against other factors such as real world experience, other certifications, and having a Bachelors degree? If you mention that other certifications are more valued, which ones are they?

    Read the article

  • Question on design of current pagination implementations

    - by Freshblood
    I have checked pagination implementations on asp.net mvc specifically and i really feel that there is something less efficient in implementations. First of all all implementations use pagination values like below. public ActionResult MostPopulars(int pageIndex,int pageSize) { } The thing that i feel wrong is pageIndex and pageSize totally should be member of Pagination class otherwise this way looks so much functional way. Also it simplify unnecesary paramater pass in tiers of application. Second thing is that they use below interface. public interface IPagedList<T> : IList<T> { int PageCount { get; } int TotalItemCount { get; } int PageIndex { get; } int PageNumber { get; } int PageSize { get; } bool HasPreviousPage { get; } bool HasNextPage { get; } bool IsFirstPage { get; } bool IsLastPage { get; } } If i want to routing my pagination to different action so i have to create new view model for encapsulate action name in it or even controller name. Another solution can be that sending this interfaced model to view then specify action and controller hard coded in pager method as parameter but i am losing totally re-usability of my view because it is strictly depends on just one action. Another thing is that they use below code in view Html.Pager(Model.PageSize, Model.PageNumber, Model.TotalItemCount) If the model is IPagedList why they don't provide an overload method like @Html.Pager(Model) or even better one is @Html.Pager(). You know that we know model type in this way. Before i was doing mistake because i was using Model.PageIndex instead of Model.PageNumber. Another big issue is they strongly rely on IQueryable interface. How they know that i use IQueryable in my data layer ? I would expected that they work simply with collections that is keep pagination implementation persistence ignorant. What is wrong about my improvement ideas over their pagination implementations ? What is their reason to not implement their paginations in this way ?

    Read the article

  • PHP questions and answers

    - by Daniel James Clarke
    Hi guys I'm a web designer and front end developer, however our only back end developer has quit and left the company. The head of development(who is a desktop developer) has asked me to find a set of Questions and Answers that are of OOP level for a LAMP developer so we can see if new candidates for the job are up to scratch. As a designer I'm out of my depth and he's unfamiliar with LAMP development. Dan

    Read the article

  • What are the tradeoffs for using 'partial view models'?

    - by Kenny Evitt
    I've become aware of an itch due to some non-DRY code pertaining to view model classes in an (ASP.NET) MVC web application and I'm thinking of scratching my itch by organizing code in various 'partial view model' classes. By partial-view-model, I'm referring to a class like a view model class in an analogous way to how partial views are like views, i.e. a way to encapsulate common info and behavior. To strengthen the 'analogy', and to aid in visually organizing the code in my IDE, I was thinking of naming the partial-view-model classes with a _ prefix, e.g. _ParentItemViewModel. As a slightly more concrete example of why I'm thinking along these lines, imagine that I have a domain-model-entity class ParentItem and the user-friendly descriptive text that identifies these items to users is complex enough that I'd like to encapsulate that code in a method in a _ParentItemViewModel class, for which I can then include an object or a collection of objects of that class in all the view model classes for all the views that need to include a reference to a parent item, e.g. ChildItemViewModel can have a ParentItem property of the _ParentItemViewModel class type, so that in my ChildItemView view, I can use @Model.ParentItem.UserFriendlyDescription as desired, like breadcrumbs, links, etc. Edited 2014-02-06 09:56 -05 As a second example, imagine that I have entity classes SomeKindOfBatch, SomeKindOfBatchDetail, and SomeKindOfBatchDetailEvent, and a view model class and at least one view for each of those entities. Also, the example application covers a lot more than just some-kind-of-batches, so that it wouldn't really be useful or sensible to include info about a specific some-kind-of-batch in all of the project view model classes. But, like the above example, I have some code, say for generating a string for identifying a some-kind-of-batch in a user-friendly way, and I'd like to be able to use that in several views, say as breadcrumb text or text for a link. As a third example, I'll describe another pattern I'm currently using. I have a Contact entity class, but it's a fat class, with dozens of properties, and at least a dozen references to other fat classes. However, a lot of view model classes need properties for referencing a specific contact and most of those need other properties for collections of contacts, e.g. possible contacts to be referenced for some kind of relationship. Most of these view model classes only need a small fraction of all of the available contact info, basically just an ID and some kind of user-friendly description (i.e. a friendly name). It seems to be pretty useful to have a 'partial view model' class for contacts that all of these other view model classes can use. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding 'view model class' – I understand a view model class as always corresponding to a view. But maybe I'm assuming too much.

    Read the article

  • Podcasting Questions and Answers

    Podcasting is an up-and-coming and increasingly popular medium for communication. The following are common questions about podcasting, perfect for those just getting started in podcasting as a commun... [Author: Sharon Housley - Computers and Internet - April 21, 2010]

    Read the article

  • SEO Frequently Asked Questions

    When starting your online business, you will definitely come across certain terms, and the most common of which are those that talk about SEO (Search Engine Optimization). To get you more familiar with it, here are some questions you may ask.

    Read the article

  • SEO Strategies and Common SEO Questions

    In order to grow in the online web market & utilize effective SEO strategies, you as a website owner need to have answer to these common SEO questions. You would be able to decide which search engine optimization and link building tactics would work for your website when you are aware of all the strategies that are involved in SEO.

    Read the article

  • Mise à jour de la FAQ JavaScript, actualisation des 174 questions réponses

    La FAQ JavaScript vient d'être mise à jour.Diverses erreurs (typographie, orthographe, ...) ont été corrigées ainsi que certaines imprécisions ou explications jugées trop datées.De même, certaines réponses ont été revues ou actualisées pour tenir compte des évolutions du langage.Cette mise à jour ne porte pas spécialement sur le fond de beaucoup de questions / réponses qui restent en discussion sur le forum Contributions JavaScript / AJAX. Vous êtes donc tous invités à participer aux discussions...

    Read the article

  • T-SQL User-Defined Functions: Ten Questions You Were Too Shy To Ask

    SQL Server User-Defined Functions are good to use in most circumstances, but there just a few questions that rarely get asked on the forums. It's a shame, because the answers to them tend to clear up some ingrained misconceptions about functions that can lead to problems, particularly with locking and performance Can 41,000 DBAs really be wrong? Join 41,000 other DBAs who are following the new series from the DBA Team: the 5 Worst Days in a DBA’s Life. Part 3, As Corrupt As It Gets, is out now – read it here.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132  | Next Page >