Search Results

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

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 207/431 | < Previous Page | 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214  | Next Page >

  • Automatic User Authentication Framework for Controllers in ASP.NET MVC?

    - by Austin
    In rails I could do something like this to make sure a user is authenticated before accessing an action in the controller: before_filter :checked_logged_in, :only => [:edit, :update] I was wondering if ASP.NET MVC had something similar or if there was a framework out there that could essentially do something like the following: For certain methods with actions that take a certain parameter, I want to point the action to a method, check to see if the user owns that object, and if so, proceed to the controller action. If not, I want to redirect him to another action where I can show him he has invalid credentials. So basically I am looking for a sort of "before_filter." Anyone know of anything out there that can do this? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Passing ViewData to PartialView returned from using Html.Action

    - by RWGodfrey
    I want to embed a partial view in an ASP.NET MVC page by returning it from an action method. In my base view, I would have: <%= Html.Action("MyPartialViewAction") %> My controller would have an action method like: [ChildActionOnly] public ActionResult MyPartialViewAction() { return PartialView("MyPartialView"); } I expected the returned partial view (MyPartialView) to have access to the ViewData that was set in the base page's controller action but that doesn't appear to be the case. If I insert the partial view by using the following in my base view it works: <% Html.RenderPartial("MyPartialView") %> I don't want to do that though because I want my "MyPartialViewAction" to execute logic to determine WHICH partial view to return.

    Read the article

  • is_admin? function in rails? - undefined method Error

    - by Newbie
    Hello! At the moment, I am creating some kind of admin panel/backend for my site. I want to do the following: Only admins (a user has a user_role(integer) -- 1 = admin, 2 = moderator, 3 = user) can see and access a link for the admin panel. So I created an admin_controller. In my admin controller I created a new function called is_admin?: class AdminController < ApplicationController def admin_panel end def is_admin? current_user.user_role == 1 end end my route looks like. map.admin_panel '/admin-panel', :controller => 'admin', :action => 'admin_panel' and in my _sidebar.html.erb (partial in applicaton.html.erb) I created the link: <%= link_to "Admin Panel", :admin_panel unless is_admin? %> Now I get an error called: undefined method `is_admin?' Where is the problem? Please help me solving this problem!

    Read the article

  • In Node.js, how can I load my modules once and then use them throughout the app?

    - by TIMEX
    I want to create one global module file, and then have all my files require that global module file. Inside that file, I would load all the modules once and export a dictionary of loaded modules. How can I do that? I actually tried creating this file...and every time I require('global_modules'), all the modules kept reloading. It's O(n). I want the file to be something like this (but it doesn't work): //global_modules.js - only load these one time var modules = { account_controller: '/account/controller.js', account_middleware: '/account/middleware.js', products_controller: '/products/controller.js', ... } exports.modules = modules;

    Read the article

  • Using OAuth along with spring security, grails

    - by GroovyUser
    I have grails app which runs on the spring security plugin. It works with no problem. I wish I could give the users the way to connect with Facebook and social networking site. So I decided to use Spring Security OAuth plugin. I have configured the plugin. Now I want user can access both via normal local account and also the OAuth authentication. More precisely I have a controller like this: @Secured(['IS_AUTHENTICATED_FULLY']) def test() { render "Home page!!!" } Now I want this controller to be accessed with OAuth authentication too. Is that possible to do so?

    Read the article

  • Decorators vs. classes in python web development.

    - by Tristan
    I've noticed three main ways Python web frameworks deal request handing: decorators, controller classes with methods for individual requests, and request classes with methods for GET/POST. I'm curious about the virtues of these three approaches. Are there major advantages or disadvantages to any of these approaches? To fix ideas, here are three examples. Bottle uses decorators: @route('/') def index(): return 'Hello World!' Pylons uses controller classes: class HelloController(BaseController): def index(self): return 'Hello World' Tornado uses request handler classes with methods for types: class MainHandler(tornado.web.RequestHandler): def get(self): self.write("Hello, world") Which style is the best practice?

    Read the article

  • Custom nib UITableViewCell height

    - by Chuck
    I've created a custom UITableViewCell in IB, linked it to the root view controller's property for it, and set it up in CellForRowAtIndexPath. But the height of my drawn cells doesn't match what I setup in IB, advice? Here's some screenshots and the code. - (UITableViewCell *)tableView:(UITableView *)tableView cellForRowAtIndexPath:(NSIndexPath *)indexPath { static NSString *AddressCellIdentifier = @"AddressCellIdent"; UITableViewCell *thisCell = [tableView dequeueReusableCellWithIdentifier:AddressCellIdentifier]; if (thisCell == nil) { [[NSBundle mainBundle] loadNibNamed:@"AddressCell" owner:self options:nil]; thisCell = addressCell; self.addressCell = nil; } return thisCell ; } addressCell is a @property (nonatomic, assign) IBOutlet UITableViewCell *addressCell;, and is linked up in IB to the file's owner (the table view controller). I'm using the example from Apple's table view programming guide.

    Read the article

  • Link redirects to "show" action instead of the indicated in routes.rb

    - by Brian Roisentul
    I'm working with Ruby on rails 2.3.4 and I'd like to have a link that executes an action when clicked. The relevant part of the routes.rb file looks like this: map.search_filter_relevance "/anuncios/buscar", :controller => 'announcements', :action => 'search_filter_relevance' My view(it's the model's index page) looks like this: <%= link_to 'M&Aacute;S RELEVANTES', search_filter_relevance_path %> And my controller looks like this: def search_filter_relevance raise params.inspect unless params[:announcements].nil? or params[:announcements].empty? @announcements = params[:announcements].order_by_featured end end The problem is that when I click the link I get an error due to some null value in the Show action! I'm not accessing that action at all...why is executing it?

    Read the article

  • Creating an Attribute to check for Exceptions

    - by BiffBaffBoff
    I'm creating an attribute so that whenever an exception occurs on my site, I'll receive an email detailing the exception. I've got so far but my Attribute code doesn't seem to fire if an exception occurs: public class ReportingAttribute : FilterAttribute, IExceptionFilter { public void OnException(ExceptionContext filterContext) { // This will generate an email to me ErrorReporting.GenerateEmail(filterContext.Exception); } } Then above my Controller I'm doing: [ReportingAttribute] public class AccountController : Controller The other way to do it is ofcourse putting ErrorReporting.GenerateEmail(ex) inside my catch blocks? There must be a simpler way? Thats why I thought of creating the Attribute to handle this

    Read the article

  • NSNotifications vs delegate for multiple instances of same protocol

    - by Brent Traut
    I could use some architectural advice. I've run into the following problem a few times now and I've never found a truly elegant way to solve it. The issue, described at the highest level possible:I have a parent class that would like to act as the delegate for multiple children (all using the same protocol), but when the children call methods on the parent, the parent no longer knows which child is making the call. I would like to use loose coupling (delegates/protocols or notifications) rather than direct calls. I don't need multiple handlers, so notifications seem like they might be overkill. To illustrate the problem, let me try a super-simplified example: I start with a parent view controller (and corresponding view). I create three child views and insert each of them into the parent view. I would like the parent view controller to be notified whenever the user touches one of the children. There are a few options to notify the parent: Define a protocol. The parent implements the protocol and sets itself as the delegate to each of the children. When the user touches a child view, its view controller calls its delegate (the parent). In this case, the parent is notified that a view is touched, but it doesn't know which one. Not good enough. Same as #1, but define the methods in the protocol to also pass some sort of identifier. When the child tells its delegate that it was touched, it also passes a pointer to itself. This way, the parent know exactly which view was touched. It just seems really strange for an object to pass a reference to itself. Use NSNotifications. The parent defines a separate method for each of the three children and then subscribes to the "viewWasTouched" notification for each of the three children as the notification sender. The children don't need to attach themselves to the user dictionary, but they do need to send the notification with a pointer to themselves as the scope. Same as #4, but rather than using separate methods, the parent could just use one with a switch case or other branching along with the notification's sender to determine which path to take. Create multiple man-in-the-middle classes that act as the delegates to the child views and then call methods on the parent either with a pointer to the child or with some other differentiating factor. This approach doesn't seem scalable. Are any of these approaches considered best practice? I can't say for sure, but it feels like I'm missing something more obvious/elegant.

    Read the article

  • rails link path and routing error

    - by Nick5a1
    <%= link_to t('.new', :default => t("helpers.links.new")), new_equipment_path, :class => 'btn btn-primary' %> I have the above code in a view, but am getting the following error when clicking the link: No route matches {:action=>"show", :controller=>"equipment"} My routes file contains: devise_for :users ActiveAdmin.routes(self) devise_for :admin_users, ActiveAdmin::Devise.config resources :equipment resources :workouts root :to => "home#index" match 'workouts/random', :to => 'workouts#random' match ':controller(/:action(/:id))(.:format)' Why is it trying to access the show action?

    Read the article

  • CoreData and many NSArrayController

    - by unixo
    In my CoreData Application, I've an outline view on left of main window, acting as source list (like iTunes); on the right I display a proper view, based on outline selection. Each view has its components, such as table view, connected to array controller, owned by the specific view. Very often different views display same data, for example, a table view of the same entity. From a performance point of view, is better to have a single array controller per entity and share it between all views or does CoreData cache avoid memory waste?

    Read the article

  • Searching for the right pattern to handle login data

    - by stevebot
    Hi all, I'm working on a controller that handles logins for a Web app. These logins will come from multiple clients but will all contain the same data. However, depending on the client, this data will be interpreted into common entities for our webapp differently. For instance, we have a user code that gets sent in, and in one case we may use the first four digits of the code, and in another case 12 digits of the code to map to a field on a User entity. Instead of handling this all in the controller and having big nasty if blocks of logic, I would like to use a pattern to handle how this information gets ingested into our application. What are your opinions?

    Read the article

  • How to send exceptions to exceptionController?

    - by ivar
    <bean class="org.springframework.web.servlet.handler.SimpleMappingExceptionResolver"> <property name="mappedHandlers"> <set> <ref bean="exceptionController" /> </set> </property> <property name="defaultErrorView" value="tiles/content/error" /> </bean> I'm trying to send exceptions to a controller so I can create a redirect. If I comment out the mappedHandlers part then the error tile is displayed but it is only a tile. The rest of the tiles load normally. I need to make a redirect in the controller so I can show an error page not just an error tile. I can't find enough information or an example how the exception invokes some method in exceptionController.

    Read the article

  • In CakePHP, how to leave all prefixes?

    - by Victor Piousbox
    I have a link that goes like this: $this->Html->link('Welcome', array('controller' => 'users', 'action' => 'add')); I suspect it doesn't work (Firefox says the redirect will never complete), so I did this: $this->Html->link('Welcome', array('controller' => 'users', 'action' => 'add', 'my'=>false)); 'my' is a prefix. I also have 'admin', 'ajax', and 'rss'. So now instead of pointing to /users/add or /my/users/add, the link points to /rss/users/add. The link is in a header, in a layout so I don't know which prefix it will be invoked from. I want to go to /users/add, that is, leave all prefixes altogether. How do I do that in CakePHP? I'm using 1.3 version.

    Read the article

  • How to save checkbox checked values in Database

    - by user1298215
    How to save checkbox values in database. Below is my view code. @foreach (var item in Model) { @Html.CheckBox("statecheck", (IEnumerable<SelectListItem>)ViewData["StatesList"]) @Html.DisplayFor(modelItem => item.state_name) </br> } <input class="ASPbutton" type="submit" value="submit"/> Below is My controller. public ActionResult States() { ViewData["StatesList"] = new SelectList(am.FindUpcomingStates().ToList(), "state_id", "state_Name"); return View(); } My model is public IQueryable<state> FindUpcomingStates() { return from state in Adm.states orderby state.state_name select state; } After clicking submit button checked item state_id will be saved into database. I wrote like below in Controller, but i got true or false values, i want state_id [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)] public ActionResult States(string _stateName, char[] statecheck, FormCollection formvalues) { statecheck = Request.Form["statecheck"].ToArray(); ViewData["StatesList"] = new SelectList(am.FindUpcomingStates222().ToList(), "state_id", "state_id", _stateName); }

    Read the article

  • [NHibernate and ASP.NET MVC] How can I implement a robust session-per-request pattern in my project,

    - by Guillaume Gervais
    I'm currently building an ASP.NET MVC project, with NHibernate as its persistance layer. For now, some functionnalities have been implemented, but only use local NHibernate sessions: each method that accessed the database (read or write) needs to instanciate its own NHibernate session, with the "using()" directive. The problem is that I want to leverage NHibernate's Lazy-Loading capabilities to improve the performance of my project. This implies an open NHibernate session per request until the view is rendered. Furthermore, simultaneous request must be supported (multiple Sessions at the same time). How can I achieve that as cleanly as possible? I searched the Web a little bit and learned about the session-per-request pattern. Most of the implementations I saw used some sort of Http* (HttpContext, etc.) object to store the session. Also, using the Application_BeginRequest/Application_EndRequest functions is complicated, since they get fired for each HTTP request (aspx files, css files, js files, etc.), when I only want to instanciate a session once per request. The concern that I have is that I don't want my views or controllers to have access to NHibernate sessions (or, more generally, NHibernate namespaces and code). That means that I do not want to handle sessions at the controller level nor the view one. I have a few options in mind. Which one seems the best ? Use interceptors (like in GRAILS) that get triggered before and after the controller action. These would open and close sessions/transactions. Is it possible in the ASP.NET MVC world? Use the CurrentSessionContext Singleton provided by NHibernate in a Web context. Using this page as an example, I think this is quite promising, but that still requires filters at the controller level. Use the HttpContext.Current.Items to store the request session. This, coupled with a few lines of code in Global.asax.cs, can easily provide me with a session on the request level. However, it means that dependencies will be injected between NHibernate and my views (HttpContext). Thank you very much!

    Read the article

  • Play 2.0 javaToDo tutorial doesn't compile

    - by chsn
    I'm trying to follow the Play2.0 JavaToDO tutorial and for some reason it just doesn't want to work. Have looked through stackoverflow and other online resources, but haven't find an answer to this and it's driving me crazy. Attached code of the Application.java package controllers; import models.Task; import play.data.Form; import play.mvc.Controller; import play.mvc.Result; public class Application extends Controller { static Form<Task> taskForm = form(Task.class); public static Result index() { return redirect(routes.Application.tasks()); } public static Result tasks() { return ok( views.html.index.render(Task.all(), taskForm)); } public static Result newTask() { return TODO; } public static Result deleteTask(Long id) { return TODO; } } Attached code of the Task java package models; import java.util.List; import javax.persistence.Entity; import play.data.Form; import play.data.validation.Constraints.Required; import play.db.ebean.Model.Finder; import play.mvc.Result; import controllers.routes; @Entity public class Task { public Long id; @Required public String label; // search public static Finder<Long,Task> find = new Finder( Long.class, Task.class); // display tasks public static List<Task> all() { return find.all(); } // create task public static void create(Task task) { task.create(task); } // delete task public static void delete(Long id) { find.ref(id).delete(id); // find.ref(id).delete(); } // create new task public static Result newTask() { Form<Task> filledForm = taskForm.bindFromRequest(); if(filledForm.hasErrors()) { return badRequest( views.html.index.render(Task.all(), filledForm) ); } else { Task.create(filledForm.get()); return redirect(routes.Application.tasks()); } } } I get a compile error on Task.java on the line static Form<Task> taskForm = form(Task.class); As I'm working on eclipse (the project is eclipsified before import), it's telling me that taskForm cannot be resolved and it also underlines every play 2 command e.g. "render(), redirect(), bindFromRequest()" asking me to create a method for it. Any ideas how to solve the compilations error and also how to get Eclipse to recognize the play2 commands? EDIT: updated Application.java package controllers; import models.Task; import play.data.Form; import play.mvc.Controller; import play.mvc.Result; public class Application extends Controller { // create new task public static Result newTask() { Form<Task> filledForm = form(Task.class).bindFromRequest(); if(filledForm.hasErrors()) { return badRequest( views.html.index.render(Task.all(), filledForm) ); } else { Task.newTask(filledForm.get()); return redirect(routes.Application.tasks()); } } public static Result index() { return redirect(routes.Application.tasks()); } public static Result tasks() { return ok( views.html.index.render(Task.all(), taskForm)); } public static Result deleteTask(Long id) { return TODO; } } Updated task.java package models; import java.util.List; import javax.persistence.Entity; import play.data.Form; import play.data.validation.Constraints.Required; import play.db.ebean.Model; import play.db.ebean.Model.Finder; import play.mvc.Result; import controllers.routes; @Entity public class Task extends Model { public Long id; @Required public String label; // Define a taskForm static Form<Task> taskForm = form(Task.class); // search public static Finder<Long,Task> find = new Finder( Long.class, Task.class); // display tasks public static List<Task> all() { return find.all(); } // create new task public static Result newTask(Task newTask) { save(task); } // delete task public static void delete(Long id) { find.ref(id).delete(id); // find.ref(id).delete(); } }

    Read the article

  • Are @property's necessary for Interface Builder?

    - by Rits
    In my UIViewController subclass, I have 3 UIView's with each a @property as an IBOutlet. I do not use these properties at all in my code. The views get instantiated as soon as the view controller is created and they are deallocated when the view controller is deallocated. I was thinking; can't I just remove the @property's? I did, and I could still connect my instance variables (with IBOutlet) in Interface Builder. So my question now is; is there any use for properties in combination with Interface Builder, or is it OK to leave them out? Is it required for some memory management or something? Or are they really just for use in your own code? And if I do leave them out, do I still need to release them in dealloc?

    Read the article

  • iOS iPad Master Detail template can't interact with detail view

    - by CraigularB
    I have an iPad app generated from the Master-Detail template in XCode. The iPad Storyboard has under the Detail View Controller a View that holds a ScrollView which holds an ImageView. In the DetailViewController.m file I added the following code to allow the ScrollView to move and zoom the image: -(UIView *)viewForZoomingInScrollView:(UIScrollView *)scrollView { return self.comicImage; } This works great on the iPhone (it's a universal app) but not the iPad; I can scroll and zoom the image on the iPhone no problem, but on the iPad it's like the ScrollView isn't responding to the touches, and I can't figure out how to pass the touches on to the ScrollView. I've already deactivated the popover controller from appearing with a right swipe like this: self.splitViewController.presentsWithGesture = NO; How do I make it so the user can interact with the ScrollView in the DetailViewController?

    Read the article

  • Rails routing issue

    - by Brob
    Hi I've just started learning rails and been going through some tutorials from learning rails (http://www.buildingwebapps.com/podcasts/79335-putting-the-page-contents-into-the) The tutorials appear to be Rails v2 and I'm on Rails v3 There is a line in the routes file which appears to be causing a problem map.view_page ':name', :controller => 'viewer', :action => 'show' The line works for the front end view i.e. my viewer controller but not for the back end I get the error NoMethodError in Viewer#show I think this has something to do with the view I am using and the line <%= @page.body %> I know it's difficult without the full code but if anyone can help that would be awesome

    Read the article

  • Rails: textfield list to array of strings

    - by poseid
    I want to take input from a textfield and turn it into an array of strings. After having submitted the "post", I want to display again the textfield, but with the array showed below. I have a view that would look like: <% form_tag "/list2array" do -%> <%= text_area_tag "mylist" %> <div><%= submit_tag 'save' %></div> <% end -%> <% @myArray.each do |item| %> <%= item %> <% end %> And as a start for the controller: class List2ArrayController < ApplicationController def index end def save @myArray = params[:mylist].split("\r\n") end end However, after the post, I only get an empty textfield without values in the array from the previous POST. Do I need to use the model layer for my experiment? How? Or do I need to modify my controller?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214  | Next Page >