Search Results

Search found 10756 results on 431 pages for 'zend controller'.

Page 141/431 | < Previous Page | 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148  | Next Page >

  • Can't log in with a valid password using Authlogic and Ruby on Rails?

    - by kbighorse
    We support a bit of an unusual scheme. We don't require a password on User creation, and use password_resets to add a password to the user later, on demand. The problem is, once a password is created, the console indicates the password is valid: user.valid_password? 'test' = true but in my UserSessions controller, @user_session.save returns false using the same password. What am I not seeing? Kimball UPDATE: Providing more details, here is the output when saving the new password: Processing PasswordResetsController#update (for 127.0.0.1 at 2011-01-31 14:01:12) [PUT] Parameters: {"commit"="Update password", "action"="update", "_method"="put", "authenticity_token"="PQD4+eIREKBfHR3/fleWuQSEtZd7RIvl7khSYo5eXe0=", "id"="v3iWW5eD9P9frbEQDvxp", "controller"="password_resets", "user"={"password"="johnwayne"}} The applicable SQL is: UPDATE users SET updated_at = '2011-01-31 22:01:12', crypted_password = 'blah', perishable_token = 'blah', password_salt = 'blah', persistence_token = 'blah' WHERE id = 580 I don't see an error per se, @user_session.save just returns false, as if the password didn't match. I skip validating passwords in the User model: class User < ActiveRecord::Base acts_as_authentic do |c| c.validate_password_field = false end Here's the simplified controller code: def create logger.info("SAVED SESSION? #{@user_session.save}") end which outputs: Processing UserSessionsController#create (for 127.0.0.1 at 2011-01-31 14:16:59) [POST] Parameters: {"commit"="Login", "user_session"={"remember_me"="0", "password"="johnwayne", "email"="[email protected]"}, "action"="create", "authenticity_token"="PQD4+eIREKBfHR3/fleWuQSEtZd7RIvl7khSYo5eXe0=", "controller"="user_sessions"} User Columns (2.2ms) SHOW FIELDS FROM users User Load (3.7ms) SELECT * FROM users WHERE (users.email = '[email protected]') ORDER BY email ASC LIMIT 1 SAVED SESSION? false CACHE (0.0ms) SELECT * FROM users WHERE (users.email = '[email protected]') ORDER BY email ASC LIMIT 1 Redirected to http://localhost:3000/login Lastly, the console indicates that the new password is valid: $ u.valid_password? 'johnwayne' = true Would love to do it all in the console, is there a way to load UserSession controller and call methods directly? Kimball

    Read the article

  • Separate functionality depending on Role in ASP.NET MVC

    - by Andrew Bullock
    I'm looking for an elegant pattern to solve this problem: I have several user roles in my system, and for many of my controller actions, I need to deal with slightly different data. For example, take /Users/Edit/1 This allows a Moderator to edit a users email address, but Administrators to edit a user's email address and password. I'd like a design for separating the two different bits of action code for the GET and the POST. Solutions I've come up with so far are: Switch inside each method, however this doesn't really help when i want different model arguments on the POST :( Custom controller factory which chooses a UsersController_ForModerators and UsersController_ForAdmins instead of just UsersController from the controller name and current user role Custom action invoker which choose the Edit_ForModerators method in a similar way to above Have an IUsersController and register a different implementation of it in my IoC container as a named instance based on Role Build an implementation of the controller at runtime using Castle DynamicProxy and manipulate the methods to those from role-based implementations Im preferring the named IoC instance route atm as it means all my urls/routing will work seamlessly. Ideas? Suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Rewrite query string "?x=y" style to "/x/y" style

    - by Ross
    I have a PHP MVC framework I've built from scratch which uses the traditional domain.com/controller/action URL routing. While I'm currently handling the below conversion in the router I'd like to replace them in the URL for cosmetic reasons. For example: controller/action?filter=bank Becomes: controller/action/filter/bank I've done a bit of experimentation with a regex but can't seem to find a match. I'm also not sure how to rewrite it using RewriteCond. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Reloading the model of a TTTableViewController

    - by user341338
    My problem is that I have a Register Controller and a Login Controller. The Login Screen displays a Login Screen or a Logout Screen depending if a user is logged in. Now when a user registers, does not close the app, and then goes to the Login Screen it will still display a Login Screen, although there is a logged in user already. This is because the Screen is created when the application loads and does not change afterwards. I tried doing this: - (id)init { if (self = [super init]) { [self invalidateModel]; [self reload]; but that did not work, since it is only called on the first init. then i tried: - (void)viewDidLoad { [self invalidateModel]; [self reload]; } But that method had the same problem. Then I found this method: - (TTNavigationMode)navigationModeForURL:(NSString*)URL; with the following options: typedef enum { TTNavigationModeNone, TTNavigationModeCreate, // a new view controller is created each time TTNavigationModeShare, // a new view controller is created, cached and re-used TTNavigationModeModal, // a new view controller is created and presented modally TTNavigationModeExternal, // an external app will be opened } TTNavigationMode; It seems like TTNavigationModeCreate would be the right thing to use, but I have no clue how to use it. Any help? Thnx.

    Read the article

  • What is the best practice for adding persistence to an MVC model?

    - by etheros
    I'm in the process of implementing an ultra-light MVC framework in PHP. It seems to be a common opinion that the loading of data from a database, file etc. should be independent of the Model, and I agree. What I'm unsure of is the best way to link this "data layer" into MVC. Datastore interacts with Model //controller public function update() { $model = $this->loadModel('foo'); $data = $this->loadDataStore('foo', $model); $data->loadBar(9); //loads data and populates Model $model->setBar('bar'); $data->save(); //reads data from Model and saves } Controller mediates between Model and Datastore Seems a bit verbose and requires the model to know that a datastore exists. //controller public function update() { $model = $this->loadModel('foo'); $data = $this->loadDataStore('foo'); $model->setDataStore($data); $model->getDataStore->loadBar(9); //loads data and populates Model $model->setBar('bar'); $model->getDataStore->save(); //reads data from Model and saves } Datastore extends Model What happens if we want to save a Model extending a database datastore to a flatfile datastore? //controller public function update() { $model = $this->loadHybrid('foo'); //get_class == Datastore_Database $model->loadBar(9); //loads data and populates $model->setBar('bar'); $model->save(); //saves } Model extends datastore This allows for Model portability, but it seems wrong to extend like this. Further, the datastore cannot make use of any of the Model's methods. //controller extends model public function update() { $model = $this->loadHybrid('foo'); //get_class == Model $model->loadBar(9); //loads data and populates $model->setBar('bar'); $model->save(); //saves } EDIT: Model communicates with DAO //model public function __construct($dao) { $this->dao = $dao; } //model public function setBar($bar) { //a bunch of business logic goes here $this->dao->setBar($bar); } //controller public function update() { $model = $this->loadModel('foo'); $model->setBar('baz'); $model->save(); } Any input on the "best" option - or alternative - is most appreciated.

    Read the article

  • How can I separate Logic/UI in Android

    - by Ungureanu Liviu
    Hi, I want as my application to be structured in 2 parts: the logic code and the UI. I've tried to implement that using a controller class(here I keep the logic code) inside of each activity. The activity send messages to controller and receive the answer in two ways: the answer is returned immediately (if the action is not complex and it can be done in a verry short time) the activity set some listeners and the controller fire this listener when the action is complete. The problems appears when the controller have a lot of objects(each object should handle a set of actions and for each action I have to set & trigger a listener): it is hard to keep the code syncronized. I'm asking if you know a better way to implement this mechanism. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Can I assign the value like this?

    - by kumar
    Exactly I ned to do something like this is this possible? <% var Controller = null; if (Model.ID== "ABC") { Controller = "Name"; } else { Controller = "Detail"; } %> <% using (Html.BeginForm("edit", Controller, FormMethod.Post, new { @id="exc-" + Model.SID})) {%> <%= Html.Summary(true)%> is this possible? if i do I am getting exception... ERROR: Cannot assign to an implicitly-typed local variable

    Read the article

  • rails, rest, render different action with responds to

    - by Sam
    Maybe my logic is not restful or know if this is how you would do it but this is what I am trying to do. I'm getting a category inside a category controller and then once I get that category I want to return to an index page in a different controller but keep that @category and the Category.busineses. Before rest I would have just done this: render :controller = "businesses" and it would have rendered the view of the index action in that controller. now in my respond_to block I have this format.html {redirect_to(business_path)} # index.html.erb format.xml { render :xml => @businesses } but of course with a render it looses the instance variable and starts with a new action. So what I want to do is render the action instead of redirecting to that action. is this possible?

    Read the article

  • Weird Rails URL issue when rendering a new action

    - by Tony
    I am rendering a new action but somehow getting the "index" URL. To be more specific, my create action looks like this: class ListingsController < ApplicationController def create @listing = Listing.new(params[:listing]) @listing.user = @current_user if @listing.save redirect_to @listing else flash[:error] = "There were errors" render :action => "new" end end end When there are errors, I get the "new" action but my URL is the index URL - http://domain.com/listings Anyone know why this would happen? My routes file is fairly standard: map.connect 'listings/send_message', :controller => 'listings', :action => 'send_message' map.resources :listings map.root :controller => "listings" map.connect ':controller/:action/:id' map.connect ':controller/:action/:id.:format'

    Read the article

  • Where are the menu,header,footer loaded in an MVC structures

    - by Saif Bechan
    I am creating an framework in PHP, and i am using and MVC structure. My link look something like this: mydomain.com/controller/action So this link loads a controller, which loads the needed action. Now my page needs a header, footer, and it has a menu which is in the database. Where do i load all these things. Is this the job of the controller, or the job of the model.

    Read the article

  • Exception handling in Spring MVC with 3 layer architecture

    - by Chorochrondochor
    I am building a simple web applications with 3 layers - DAO, Service, MVC. When in my Controller I want to delete menu group and it contains menus I am getting ConstraintViolationException. Where should I handle this exception? In DAO, Service, or in Controller? Currently I am handling the exception in Controller. My code below. DAO method for deleting menu groups: @Override public void delete(E e){ if (e == null){ throw new DaoException("Entity can't be null."); } getCurrentSession().delete(e); } Service method for deleting menu groups: @Override @Transactional(readOnly = false) public void delete(MenuGroupEntity menuGroupEntity) { menuGroupDao.delete(menuGroupEntity); } Controller method for deleting menu groups in Controller: @RequestMapping(value = "/{menuGroupId}/delete", method = RequestMethod.GET) public ModelAndView delete(@PathVariable Long menuGroupId, RedirectAttributes redirectAttributes){ MenuGroupEntity menuGroupEntity = menuGroupService.find(menuGroupId); if (menuGroupEntity != null){ try { menuGroupService.delete(menuGroupEntity); redirectAttributes.addFlashAttribute("flashMessage", "admin.menu-group-deleted"); redirectAttributes.addFlashAttribute("flashMessageType", "success"); } catch (Exception e){ redirectAttributes.addFlashAttribute("flashMessage", "admin.menu-group-could-not-be-deleted"); redirectAttributes.addFlashAttribute("flashMessageType", "danger"); } } return new ModelAndView("redirect:/admin/menu-group"); }

    Read the article

  • presenting modal views in a popover

    - by sengbsd
    Hi, Im trying to load a modal view from a view controller that is displayed in a popover. The modal view loads but the problem is that it transitions into the main view and not within the popover. Is it something Im missing? I thought simply initiating it from a vc within a popover would present the modal view within the same popover... The code is nothing special as bellow: - (IBAction)myButton{ ModalVC *controller = [[ModalVC alloc] initWithNibName:@"ModalVC" bundle:nil]; [self presentModalViewController:controller animated:YES]; [controller release]; }

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC 3 embrace dynamic type - CSDN.NET - CSDN Software Development Channel

    - by user559071
    About a decade ago, Microsoft will all bet on the WebForms and static types. With the complete package from scattered to the continuous development, and now almost every page can be viewed as its own procedure. Subsequent years, the industry continued to move in another direction, love is better than separation package, better than the late binding early binding to the idea. This leads to two very interesting questions. The first is the problem of terminology. Consider the original Smalltalk MVC model, view and controller is not only tightly coupled together, and usually in pairs. Most of the framework is that Microsoft, including the classic VB, WinForms, WebForms, WPF and Silverlight, they both use the code behind file to store the controller logic. But said "MVC" usually refers to the view and controller are loosely coupled framework. This is especially true for the Web framework, HTML form submission mechanism allows any views submitted to any of the controller. Since this article was mainly talking about Web technologies, so we need to use the modern definition. The second question is "If you're Microsoft, how to change orbit without causing too much pressure to the developer?" So far, the answer is: new releases each year, until the developers meet up. ASP.NET MVC's first product was released last March. Released in March this year, ASP.NET MVC 2.0. 3.0 RC 2 is currently in phase, expected to be released next March. December 10, Microsoft released ASP.NET MVC 3.0 Release Candidate 2. RC 2 is built on top of Microsoft's commitment to the jQuery: The default project template into jQuery 1.4.4, jQuery Validation 1.7 and jQuery UI. Although people think that Microsoft will focus shifted away from server-side controls to be a joke, but the introduction of Microsoft's jQuery UI is that this is the real thing. For those worried about the scalability of the developers, there are many excellent control can replace the session state. With SessionState property, you can tell the controller session state is read-only, read-write, or can be completely ignored in the. This site is no single server, but if a server needs to access another server session state, then this approach can provide a great help. MVC 3 contains Razor view engine. By default, the engine will be encoded HTML output, so that we can easily output on the screen the text of the original. HTML injection attacks even without the risk of encoded text can not easily prevent the page rendering. For many C # developers in the end do what is most shocking that MVC 3 for the controller and view and embrace the dynamic type. ViewBag property will open a dynamic object, developers can run on top of the object to add attributes. In general, it is used to send the view from the controller non-mode data. Scott Guthrie provides state of the sample contains text (such as the current time) and used to assemble the list box entries. Asked Link: http://www.infoq.com/cn/news/2010/12/ASPNET-MVC-3-RC-2; jsessionid = 3561C3B7957F1FB97848950809AD9483

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC Default URL View

    - by Moose Factory
    I'm trying to set the Default URL of my MVC application to a view within an area of my application. The area is called "Common", the controller "Home" and the view "Index". I've tried setting the defaultUrl in the forms section of web.config to "~/Common/Home/Index" with no success. I've also tried mapping a new route in global.asax, thus: routes.MapRoute( "Area", "{area}/{controller}/{action}/{id}", new { area = "Common", controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = "" } ); Again, to no avail.

    Read the article

  • Griffon command line arguments

    - by jjchiw
    How to use getStartupArgs() Since 0.9.1 it seems you can read the command line arguments issue #245 with the getStartupArgs() method (documentation) But I do know how to use it, I've put it in in all the Griffon lifecycle, Controller, Service, and I get the exception org.codehaus.groovy.runtime.InvokerInvocationException: groovy.lang.MissingMethodException: No signature of method: [LifeCycle|Controller|Service].getStartupArgs() is applicable for argument types: () values: [] Caused by: groovy.lang.MissingMethodException: No signature of method: [LifeCycle|Controller|Service].getStartupArgs() is applicable for argument types: () values: [ ]

    Read the article

  • Rails engines extending functionality

    - by sinsiliux
    So I have an engine which defines some models and controllers. I want to be able to extend functionality of some models/controllers in my application (eg. adding methods) without loosing the original model/controller functionality from engine. Everywhere I read that you simply need to define controller with the same name in your application and Rails will automatically merge them, however it doesn't work for me and controller in engine is simply ignored (I don't think it's even loaded).

    Read the article

  • Rails 3 routing - what's best practice?

    - by Mattias
    Hi guys, I'm trying out Rails, and I've stumbled across an issue with my routing. I have a controller named "Account" (singular), which should handle various settings for the currently logged in user. class AccountController < ApplicationController def index end def settings end def email_settings end end How would I set-up the routes for this in a proper manner? At the moment I have: match 'account(/:action)', :to => 'account', :as => 'account' This however does not automagically produce methods like account_settings_path but only account_path Is there any better practice of doing this? Remember the Account controller doesn't represent a controller for an ActiveModel. If this is in fact the best practice, how would I generate links in my views for the actions? url_to :controller => :account, :action => :email_settings ? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to stop a UIViewController from being popped from a UINavigationController's stack wh

    - by yabada
    I have a UINavigationController with a root view controller and then I push a UIViewController onto the navigation controller's stack. When the user taps the backBarButtonItem I'd like to be able to have an alert view pop up if there are certain conditions met and cancel the pop of the view controller. For example, the user can make certain selections but some combination of them may be invalid so I want to notify them to make changes. I know that I can prevent the user from making an invalid combination or have an alert view pop up when the invalid combination is selected but I'd rather not do that. The user may be changing selections and may be aware that a certain combination is invalid but I'd rather let them select something that makes the combination invalid then go change something else (and notify them if they haven't made changes before trying to go to the previous screen). For example, if I prevent them from make the invalid combination then they may have to scroll up on a screen, change something, then scroll back down instead of making a selection then scrolling up and changing something. Using viewWillDisappear: doesn't work because, although I can produce an alert view, I cannot figure out a way to prevent the pop from occurring. The alert view pops up but the view controller still pops and they are back to the root view controller (with the alert view displaying). Is there a way to prevent the pop from occurring? If not, is this something worth filing a bug report about or is this unnecessary and/or esoteric?

    Read the article

  • in asp.net mvc is it possible to register routes somewhere other than application.Start()

    - by joe q.
    Hi, is it possible to create and register routes after Application.Start() is called? let's say have a controller, PersonController. With default routing, URLs could look something like www.site.com/Person/Edit/4, with 'Person' matching the controller. now imagine I have several users, some may prefer we use the term 'Friends'. I would like to use the same controller, and have /Friends/Edit/4 map to the same controller/action/id. Maybe someone else prefers /Comrades/Edit/4. with the naming preferences stored in a database, is there a way that I can dynamically create these routes at some point mid-application, after the user has logged in? thanks!

    Read the article

  • How To Get Values From UISegmentcontroller.

    - by iappdevs
    Hi, I Created Segment Control through Interface Builder. Created a IBAction and Linked to Value Changed Option of segment Controller. (IBAction)GenderBttonAction:(id)sender { printf("\n Segemt Controll"); } When i click on segment controller this method is calling , but how would i get the seleced index value of segment controller. Please help me dears.

    Read the article

  • Grails g:paginate tag and custom URL

    - by aboxy
    Hello, I am trying to use g:paginate in a shared template where depending on the controller, url changes e.g. For my homepage url should be : mydomain[DOT]com/news/recent/(1..n) For search Page: www[DOT]mydomain[DOT]com/search/query/"ipad apps"/filter/this month and my g:paginate looks like this: g:paginate controller=${customeController} action=${customAction} total:${total} For the first case, I was able to provide controller as 'news' and action as 'recent' and mapped url /news/recent/$offset to my controller. But for the search page, I am not able to achieve what I want to do. I have a URL mapping defined as /search/$filter**(controller:"search",action:"fetch") $filter can be /query/"ipad apps"/filter/thismonth/filter/something/filter/somethingelse. I want to be able to show the url as above rather than ?query="ipad apps"&filter=thismonth&filter=something&filter=somethingelse. I believe I can pass all the parameters in params attribute of g:paginate but that will not give me pretty URL. What would be the best way to achieve this? Please feel free to ask questions If i missed anything.Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • rewrite rule for codeigniter

    - by John
    this is my controller in CI class Welcome extends Controller { function Welcome() { parent::Controller(); } function index() { } function bil($model='') { } I want to do a rewrite so that http://example.com/index.php/welcome/bil/model becomes http://example.com/model in my htaccess I have RewriteBase / RewriteCond $1 !^(index\.php|images|robots\.txt) RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d RewriteRule ^(.*)$ /index.php/welcome/$1 [L] #RewriteRule ^(.*)$ /index.php/welcome/bil/$1 [L] I thought it should be as easy as removing the /index.php/welcome/ part but when I uncomment the last line it get 500 internal server error

    Read the article

  • Multiple generic parameters on a html helper extension method

    - by WestDiscGolf
    What I'm trying to do is create an extension method for the HtmlHelper to create a specific output and associated details like TextBoxFor<. What I want to do is specify the property from the model class as per TextBoxFor<, then an associated controller action and other parameters. So far the signature of the method looks like: public static MvcHtmlString Create<TModel, TProperty, TController>(this HtmlHelper<TModel> htmlHelper, Expression<Func<TModel, TProperty>> expression, Expression<Action<TController>> action, object htmlAttributes) where TController : Controller where TModel : class The issue occurs when I go to call it. In my view if I call it as per the TextBoxFor without specifying the Model type I am able to specify the lambda expression to set the property which it's for, but when I go to specify the action I am unable to. However, when I specify the controller type Html.Create<HomeController>( ... ) I am unable to specify the model property that the control is to be created for. I want to be able to call it like <%= Html.Create(x => x.Title, controller => controller.action, null) %> I've been hitting my head for a few hours now on this issue over the past day, can anyone point me in the right direction?

    Read the article

  • NSPopupButton Bindings with Value Transformer

    - by rdelmar
    I don't know if what I see with a popup button populated by bindings with a value transformer is the way it's supposed to be or not -- the unusual thing I'm seeing (at least with respect to what I've seen with value transformers and table views) is that the "value" parameter in the transformedValue: method is the whole array bound to the array controller, not the individual strings in the array. When I've done this with table views, the transformer is called once for each displayed row in the table, and the "value" parameter is whatever object is bound to that row and column, not the whole array that serves as the content array for the array controller. I have a very simple app to test this. In the app delegate there is this: +(void)initialize { RDTransformer *transformer = [[RDTransformer alloc] init]; [NSValueTransformer setValueTransformer:transformer forName:@"testTransformer"]; } - (void)applicationDidFinishLaunching:(NSNotification *)aNotification { self.theData = @[@{@"name":@"William", @"age":@"24"},@{@"name":@"Thomas", @"age":@"23"},@{@"name":@"Alexander", @"age":@"64"},@{@"name":@"James", @"age":@"47"}]; } In the RDTransformer class is this: + (Class)transformedValueClass { return [NSString class]; } +(BOOL)allowsReverseTransformation { return NO; } -(id)transformedValue:(id)value { NSLog(@"%@",value); return value; } In IB, I added an NSPopupButton to the window and an array controller to the objects list. The content array of the controller is bound to App Delegate.theData, and the Content Values of the popup button is bound to Array Controller.arrangedObjects.name with the value transformer, testTransformer. When I run the program, the log from the transformedValue: method is this: 2012-09-19 20:31:39.975 PopupBindingWithTransformer[793:303] ( ) 2012-09-19 20:31:40.019 PopupBindingWithTransformer[793:303] ( William, Thomas, Alexander, James ) This doesn't seem to be other people's experience from what I can see on SO. Is there something I'm doing wrong with either the bindings or the value transformer?

    Read the article

  • Scala contiguous match

    - by drypot
    pathTokens match { case List("post") => ("post", "index") case List("search") => ("search", "index") case List() => ("home", "index") } match { case (controller, action) => loadController(http, controller, action) case _ => null } I wanted contiguous match. but got compile error. :( (pathTokens match { case List("post") => ("post", "index") case List("search") => ("search", "index") case List() => ("home", "index") }) match { case (controller, action) => loadController(http, controller, action) case _ => null } When I wrapped first match with parenparenthesis, it worked ok. Why I need parenthesis here ?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148  | Next Page >