Search Results

Search found 42264 results on 1691 pages for 'template method pattern'.

Page 230/1691 | < Previous Page | 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237  | Next Page >

• Zend models and database relathionships

  - by user608341

  Hi people, i'm starting with Zend Framework and I'm a little bit confused with models and relathionships (one-to-many, many-to-many etc). The "Zend Framework Quick Start" says to create a Zend_Db_Table, a Data Mapper and finally our model class Suppose we have a database like this: table A ( id integer primary key, name varchar(50) ); table B ( id integer primary key, a_id integer references A ); then, i'll create: Application_Model_DbTable_A extends Zend_Db_Table_Abstract, Application_Model_AMapper, Application_Model_A, Application_Model_DbTable_B extends Zend_Db_Table_Abstract, Application_Model_BMapper, Application_Model_B, if I understood, i've to store the references informations in Application_Model_DbTable_A: protected $_dependentTables = array('B'); and Application_Model_DbTable_B: protected $_referenceMap = array( 'A' => array( 'columns' => array('a_id'), 'refTableClass' => 'A', 'refColums' => array('id') ) ); and my models class: class Application_Model_A { protected $_id; protected $_name; public function __construct(array $options = null) { if(is_array($options)) { $this->setOptions($options); } } public function __set($name, $value) { $method = 'set' . $name; if (('mapper' == $name) || !method_exists($this, $method)) { throw new Exception('Invalid property'); } $this->$method($value); } public function __get($name) { $method = 'get' . $name; if (('mapper' == $name) || !method_exists($this, $method)) { throw new Exception('Invalid property'); } return $this->$method(); } public function setOptions(array $options) { $methods = get_class_methods($this); foreach ($options as $key => $value) { $method = 'set' . ucfirst($key); if (in_array($method, $methods)) { $this->$method($value); } } return $this; } public function setName($name) { $this->_name = (string) $name; return $this; } public function getName() { return $this->_name; } public function setId($id) { $this->_id = (int) $id; return $this; } public function getId() { return $this->_id; } class Application_Model_B { protected $_id; protected $_a_id; public function __construct(array $options = null) { if(is_array($options)) { $this->setOptions($options); } } public function __set($name, $value) { $method = 'set' . $name; if (('mapper' == $name) || !method_exists($this, $method)) { throw new Exception('Invalid property'); } $this->$method($value); } public function __get($name) { $method = 'get' . $name; if (('mapper' == $name) || !method_exists($this, $method)) { throw new Exception('Invalid property'); } return $this->$method(); } public function setOptions(array $options) { $methods = get_class_methods($this); foreach ($options as $key => $value) { $method = 'set' . ucfirst($key); if (in_array($method, $methods)) { $this->$method($value); } } return $this; } public function setA_id($a_id) { $this->_a_id = (int) $a_id; return $this; } public function getA_id() { return $this->_a_id; } public function setId($id) { $this->_id = (int) $id; return $this; } public function getId() { return $this->_id; } it's that right?

  Read the article

• WPF: How to data bind an object to an element and apply a data template through code?

  - by Boris

  I have created a class LeagueMatch. public class LeagueMatch { public string Home { get { return home; } set { home = value; } } public string Visitor { get { return visitor; } set { visitor = value; } } private string home; private string visitor; public LeagueMatch() { } } Next, I have defined a datatemplate resource for LeagueMatch objects in XAML: <DataTemplate x:Key="MatchTemplate" DataType="{x:Type entities:LeagueMatch}"> <Grid Name="MatchGrid" Width="140" Height="50" Margin="5"> <Grid.RowDefinitions> <RowDefinition Height="*" /> <RowDefinition Height="*" /> <RowDefinition Height="*" /> </Grid.RowDefinitions> <TextBlock Grid.Row="0" Text="{Binding Home}" /> <TextBlock Grid.Row="1" Text="- vs -" /> <TextBlock Grid.Row="2" Text="{Binding Visitor}" /> </Grid> </DataTemplate> In the XAML code-behind, I want to create a ContentPresenter object and to set it's data binding to a previously initialized LeagueMatch object and apply the defined data template. How is that supposed to be done? Thanks.

  Read the article

• In the iPad SplitView template, where's the code that specifies which views are to be used in the Sp

  - by Dr Dork

  In the iPad Programming Guide, it gives the following code example for specifying the two views (firstVC and secondVC) that will be used in the SplitView... - (BOOL)application:(UIApplication *)application didFinishLaunchingWithOptions:(NSDictionary *)launchOptions { MyFirstViewController* firstVC = [[[MyFirstViewController alloc] initWithNibName:@"FirstNib" bundle:nil] autorelease]; MySecondViewController* secondVC = [[[MySecondViewController alloc] initWithNibName:@"SecondNib" bundle:nil] autorelease]; UISplitViewController* splitVC = [[UISplitViewController alloc] init]; splitVC.viewControllers = [NSArray arrayWithObjects:firstVC, secondVC, nil]; [window addSubview:splitVC.view]; [window makeKeyAndVisible]; return YES; } but when I actually create a new SplitView project in Xcode, I don't see any code that specifies which views should be added to the SplitView. Here's the code from the SplitView template... - (BOOL)application:(UIApplication *)application didFinishLaunchingWithOptions:(NSDictionary *)launchOptions { // Override point for customization after app launch rootViewController.managedObjectContext = self.managedObjectContext; // Add the split view controller's view to the window and display. [window addSubview:splitViewController.view]; [window makeKeyAndVisible]; return YES; } Thanks in advance for all your help! I'm going to continue researching this question right now.

  Read the article

• Private Java class properties mysteriously reset between method calls....

  - by Michael Jones

  I have a very odd problem. A class property is mysteriously reset between method calls. The following code is executed so the constructor is called, then the parseConfiguration method is called. Finally, processData is called. The parseConfiguration method sets the "recursive" property to "true". However, as soon as it enters "processData", "recursive" becomes "false". This problem isn't isolated to a single class -- I have several examples of this in my code. How can this possibly be happening? I've tried initialising properties when they're declared outside any methods, I've tried initialising them in constructors... nothing works. The only complication I can think of here is that this class is invoked by an object that runs in a thread -- but here is one instance per thread, so surely no chance that threads are interfering. I've tried setting both methods to "synchronized", but this still happens. Please help! /** * This class or its superclasses are NOT threaded and don't extend Thread */ public class DirectoryAcquirer extends Manipulator { /** * @var Whether to recursively scan directories */ private boolean recursive = false; /** * Constructor */ public DirectoryAcquirer() { } /** * Constructor that initialises the configuration * * @param config * @throws InvalidConfigurationException */ public DirectoryAcquirer(HierarchicalConfiguration config) throws InvalidConfigurationException { super(config); } @Override protected void parseConfiguration() throws InvalidConfigurationException { // set whether to recurse into directories or not if (this.config.containsKey("recursive")) { // this.recursive gets set to "true" here this.recursive = this.config.getBoolean("recursive"); } } @Override public EntityCollection processData(EntityCollection data) { // here this.recursive is "false" this.logger.debug("processData: Entered method"); } }

  Read the article

• Problem with TTWebController… alternative view controller template for UIWebView?

  - by prendio2

  I have a UIWebView with content populated from a Last.fm API call. This content contains links, many of which are handled by parsing info from the URL in: - (BOOL)webView:(UIWebView *)aWbView shouldStartLoadWithRequest:(NSURLRequest *)request navigationType:(UIWebViewNavigationType)navigationType; …and passing that info on to appropraite view controllers. When I cannot handle a URL I would like to push a new view controller on the stack and load the webpage into a UIWebView there. The TTWebController in Three20 looks very promising since it has also implemented a navigation toolbar, loading indicators etc. Somewhat naively perhaps I thought I would be able to use this controller to display web content in my app, without implementing Three20 throughout the app. I followed the instructions on github to add Three20 to my project and added the following code to deal with URLs in shouldStartLoadWithRequest: TTWebController* browser = [[TTWebController alloc]init]; [browser openURL:@"http://three20.info"]; //initially test with this URL [self.navigationController pushViewController:navigator animated:YES]; This crashes my app however with the following notice: *** -[TTNavigator setParentViewController:]: unrecognized selector sent to instance 0x3d5db70 What else do I need to do to implement the TTWebController in my app? Or do you know of an alternative view controller template that I can use instead of the Three20 implementation?

  Read the article

• What is the best method for updating all changed data in EF 4?

  - by Soul_Master

  I try to create some method that can update any changed data from changed Data object (this object is generated by ASP.NET MVC) to old Data object (this object is retrieved from current data in DBMS) like the following code. public static bool UpdateSomeData(SomeEntities context, SomeModelType changedData) { var oldData = GetSomeModelTypeById(context, changedData.ID); UpdateModel(oldData, changedData); return context.SaveChanges() > 0; } I try to create method for saving any changed data without affects other unchanged data like the following source code. public static void UpdateModel<TModel>(TModel oldData, TModel changedData) { foreach (var pi in typeof(TModel).GetProperties() .Where ( // Ignore Change ID property for security reason x => x.Name.ToUpper() != "ID" && x.CanRead && x.CanWrite && ( // It must be primitive type or Guid x.PropertyType.FullName.StartsWith("System") && !x.PropertyType.FullName.StartsWith("System.Collection") && !x.PropertyType.FullName.StartsWith("System.Data.Entity.DynamicProxies") ) ) { var oldValue = pi.GetValue(oldData, null); var newValue = pi.GetValue(changedData, null); if (!oldValue.Equals(newValue)) { pi.SetValue(oldData, newValue, null); } } } I am not sure about the above method because it is so ugly method for updating data. From recent bug, it realizes me that if you update some property like Navigation Properties (related data from other table), it will remove current record from database. I don't understand why it happened. But it is very dangerous for me. So, do you have any idea for this question to ensure me about updating data from ASP.NET MVC? Thanks,

  Read the article

• Intermittent asp.net mvc exception: “A public action method ABC could not be found on controller XYZ

  - by Chris Schoon

  Hi, I'm getting an intermittent exception saying that asp.net mvc can’t find the action method. Here’s the exception: A public action method 'Fill' could not be found on controller 'Schoon.Form.Web.Controllers.ChrisController'. I think I have the routing set up correctly because this application works most of the time. Here is the controller’s action method. [ActionName("Fill")] [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Get | HttpVerbs.Post), UserIdFilter, DTOFilter] public ActionResult Fill(int userId, int subscriberId, DisplayMode? mode) { //… } The route: routes.MapRoute( "SchoonForm", "Form/Fill/{subscriberId}", new { controller = "ChrisController", action = "Fill" }, new { subscriberId = @"\d+" } ); And here is the stack: System.Web.HttpException: A public action method 'Fill' could not be found on controller 'Schoon.Form.Web.Controllers.ChrisController'. at System.Web.Mvc.Controller.HandleUnknownAction(String actionName) in C:\dev\ThirdParty\MvcDev\src\SystemWebMvc\Mvc\Controller.cs:line 197 at System.Web.Mvc.Controller.ExecuteCore() in C:\dev\ThirdParty\MvcDev\src\SystemWebMvc\Mvc\Controller.cs:line 164 at System.Web.Mvc.ControllerBase.Execute(RequestContext requestContext) in C:\dev\ThirdParty\MvcDev\src\SystemWebMvc\Mvc\ControllerBase.cs:line 76 at System.Web.Mvc.ControllerBase.System.Web.Mvc.IController.Execute(RequestContext requestContext) in C:\dev\ThirdParty\MvcDev\src\SystemWebMvc\Mvc\ControllerBase.cs:line 87 at System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.ProcessRequest(HttpContextBase httpContext) in C:\dev\ThirdParty\MvcDev\src\SystemWebMvc\Mvc\MvcHandler.cs:line 80 at System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.ProcessRequest(HttpContext httpContext) in C:\dev\ThirdParty\MvcDev\src\SystemWebMvc\Mvc\MvcHandler.cs:line 68 at System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.System.Web.IHttpHandler.ProcessRequest(HttpContext httpContext) in C:\dev\ThirdParty\MvcDev\src\SystemWebMvc\Mvc\MvcHandler.cs:line 104 at System.Web.HttpApplication.CallHandlerExecutionStep.System.Web.HttpApplication.IExecutionStep.Execute() at System.Web.HttpApplication.ExecuteStep(IExecutionStep step, Boolean& completedSynchronously) Here is an example of my filters they all work the same way: public class UserIdFilter : ActionFilterAttribute { public override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext filterContext) { const string Key = "userId"; if (filterContext.ActionParameters.ContainsKey(Key)) { filterContext.ActionParameters[Key] = // get the user id from session or cookie } base.OnActionExecuting(filterContext); } } Thanks, Chris

  Read the article

• How to display combo box as textbox in WPF via a style template trigger?

  - by Greg R

  I would like to display a combobox drop down list as a textbox when it's set to be read only. For some reason I can't seem to bind the text of the selected item in the combo box to the textbox. This is my XAML: <Style x:Key="EditableDropDown" TargetType="ComboBox"> <Style.Triggers> <Trigger Property="IsReadOnly" Value="True"> <Setter Property="Background" Value="#FFFFFF" /> <Setter Property="Template"> <Setter.Value> <ControlTemplate TargetType="ComboBox"> <TextBox Text="{TemplateBinding SelectedItem, Converter={StaticResource StringCaseConverter}}" BorderThickness="0" Background="Transparent" FontSize="{TemplateBinding FontSize}" HorizontalAlignment="{TemplateBinding HorizontalAlignment}" FontFamily="{TemplateBinding FontFamily}" Width="{TemplateBinding Width}" TextWrapping="Wrap"/> </ControlTemplate> </Setter.Value> </Setter> </Trigger> </Style.Triggers> </Style> <ComboBox IsReadOnly="{Binding ReadOnlyMode}" Style="{StaticResource EditableDropDown}" Margin="0 0 10 0"> <ComboBoxItem IsSelected="True">Test</ComboBoxItem> </ComboBox> When I do this, I get the following as the text: System.Windows.Controls.ComboBoxItem: Test I would really appreciate the help!

  Read the article

• How might I wrap the FindXFile-style APIs to the STL-style Iterator Pattern in C++?

  - by BillyONeal

  Hello everyone :) I'm working on wrapping up the ugly innards of the FindFirstFile/FindNextFile loop (though my question applies to other similar APIs, such as RegEnumKeyEx or RegEnumValue, etc.) inside iterators that work in a manner similar to the Standard Template Library's istream_iterators. I have two problems here. The first is with the termination condition of most "foreach" style loops. STL style iterators typically use operator!= inside the exit condition of the for, i.e. std::vector<int> test; for(std::vector<int>::iterator it = test.begin(); it != test.end(); it++) { //Do stuff } My problem is I'm unsure how to implement operator!= with such a directory enumeration, because I do not know when the enumeration is complete until I've actually finished with it. I have sort of a hack together solution in place now that enumerates the entire directory at once, where each iterator simply tracks a reference counted vector, but this seems like a kludge which can be done a better way. The second problem I have is that there are multiple pieces of data returned by the FindXFile APIs. For that reason, there's no obvious way to overload operator* as required for iterator semantics. When I overload that item, do I return the file name? The size? The modified date? How might I convey the multiple pieces of data to which such an iterator must refer to later in an ideomatic way? I've tried ripping off the C# style MoveNext design but I'm concerned about not following the standard idioms here. class SomeIterator { public: bool next(); //Advances the iterator and returns true if successful, false if the iterator is at the end. std::wstring fileName() const; //other kinds of data.... }; EDIT: And the caller would look like: SomeIterator x = ??; //Construct somehow while(x.next()) { //Do stuff } Thanks! Billy3

  Read the article

• Why is this linq extension method hit the database twice?

  - by Pure.Krome

  Hi folks, I have an extension method called ToListIfNotNullOrEmpty(), which is hitting the DB twice, instead of once. The first time it returns one result, the second time it returns all the correct results. I'm pretty sure the first time it hits the database, is when the .Any() method is getting called. here's the code. public static IList<T> ToListIfNotNullOrEmpty<T>(this IEnumerable<T> value) { if (value.IsNullOrEmpty()) { return null; } if (value is IList<T>) { return (value as IList<T>); } return new List<T>(value); } public static bool IsNullOrEmpty<T>(this IEnumerable<T> value) { if (value != null) { return !value.Any(); } return true; } I'm hoping to refactor it so that, before the .Any() method is called, it actually enumerates through the entire list. If i do the following, only one DB call is made, because the list is already enumerated. var pewPew = (from x in whatever select x) .ToList() // This enumerates. .ToListIsNotNullOrEmpty(); // This checks the enumerated result. I sorta don't really want to call ToList() then my extension method. Any ideas, folks?

  Read the article

• How can I refactor this to work without breaking the pattern horribly?

  - by SnOrfus

  I've got a base class object that is used for filtering. It's a template method object that looks something like this. public class Filter { public void Process(User u, GeoRegion r, int countNeeded) { List<account> selected = this.Select(u, r, countNeeded); // 1 List<account> filtered = this.Filter(selected, u, r, countNeeded); // 2 if (filtered.Count > 0) { /* do businessy stuff */ } // 3 if (filtered.Count < countNeeded) this.SendToSuccessor(u, r, countNeeded - filtered) // 4 } } Select(...), Filter(...) are protected abstract methods and implemented by the derived classes. Select(...) finds objects in the based on x criteria, Filter(...) filters those selected further. If the remaining filtered collection has more than 1 object in it, we do some business stuff with it (unimportant to the problem here). SendToSuccessor(...) is called if there weren't enough objects found after filtering (it's a composite where the next class in succession will also be derived from Filter but have different filtering criteria) All has been ok, but now I'm building another set of filters, which I was going to subclass from this. The filters I'm building however would require different params and I don't want to just implement those methods and not use the params or just add to the param list the ones I need and have them not used in the existing filters. They still perform the same logical process though. I also don't want to complicated the consumer code for this (which looks like this) Filter f = new Filter1(); Filter f2 = new Filter2(); Filter f3 = new Filter3(); f.Sucessor = f2; f2.Sucessor = f3; /* and so on adding filters as successors to previous ones */ foreach (User u in users) { foreach (GeoRegion r in regions) { f.Process(u, r, ##); } } How should I go about it?

  Read the article

• Why doesn't the SplitView iPhone template have a nib file for the RootView?

  - by Dr Dork

  I'm diving into iPad development and am learning a lot quickly, but everywhere I look, I have questions. After creating a new SplitView app in Xcode using the template, it generates the AppDelegate class, RootViewController class, and DetailViewController class. Along with that, it creates a .xib files for MainWinow.xib and DetailView.xib. How do these five files work together? Why is there a nib file for the DetailView, but not the RootView? When I double click on the MainWindow.xib file, Interface Builder launches without a "View" window, why? Below is the code for didFinishLaunchingWithOptions method inside the AppDelegate class. Why are we adding the splitViewController as a subview? (BOOL)application:(UIApplication *)application didFinishLaunchingWithOptions:(NSDictionary *)launchOptions { // Override point for customization after app launch rootViewController.managedObjectContext = self.managedObjectContext; // Add the split view controller's view to the window and display. [window addSubview:splitViewController.view]; [window makeKeyAndVisible]; return YES; } Thanks so much in advance for all your help! I still have a lot to learn, so I apologize if this question is absurd in any way. I'm going to continue researching these questions right now!

  Read the article

• Silverlight Business Application template with WCF is throwing warning.

  - by Manoj

  Hi, I am using the Silvelight Business Application template. I wrote a function which uses Membership.getUserList function to return the user list. I tried exposing it as Service using WCF. But when I try to compile the client side code it throws a warning saying "Client Proxy Generation for user_authentication.Web.Service1 failed'. Why does it happen? The complete warning message is: Warning 4 Client proxy generation for service 'user_authentication.Web.Service1' failed: Generating metadata files... Warning: Unable to load a service with configName 'user_authentication.Web.Service1'. To export a service provide both the assembly containing the service type and an executable with configuration for this service. Details:Either none of the assemblies passed were executables with configuration files or none of the configuration files contained services with the config name 'user_authentication.Web.Service1'. Warning: No metadata files were generated. No service contracts were exported. To export a service, use the /serviceName option. To export data contracts, specify the /dataContractOnly option. This can sometimes occur in certain security contexts, such as when the assembly is loaded over a UNC network file share. If this is the case, try copying the assembly into a trusted environment and running it.

  Read the article

• WP7 - group of textboxes into some sort of template?

  - by Jeff V

  I'm still pretty new at Silverlight so there might be a way to do this, but I'm just unfamiliar with the terminology... I basically have this grouping of textboxes and textblocks and I would like to repeat this same grouping whenever the addNew button is clicked. Is there a way to do this by creating some sort of template? Or do I have to add each item individually. <Grid> <toolkit:ListPicker Height="70" HorizontalAlignment="Right" Name="listPicker1" VerticalAlignment="Top" Width="56" ItemTemplate="{StaticResource PickerItemTemplate}" FullModeItemTemplate="{StaticResource PickerFullModeItemTemplate}" Margin="0,97,167,0"></toolkit:ListPicker> <TextBlock Height="33" HorizontalAlignment="Left" Margin="10,7,0,0" Name="tbDate" Text="Date:" VerticalAlignment="Top" Width="266" /> <TextBlock Height="42" HorizontalAlignment="Left" Margin="9,55,0,0" Name="tbItem" Text="Item:" VerticalAlignment="Top" Width="90" /> <TextBox Height="75" HorizontalAlignment="Left" Margin="92,33,0,0" Name="tbItemName" Text="" VerticalAlignment="Top" Width="341" /> <TextBlock Height="42" HorizontalAlignment="Left" Margin="5,118,0,0" Name="tbServing" Text="Serving:" VerticalAlignment="Top" Width="99" /> <TextBox Height="70" HorizontalAlignment="Left" Margin="90,96,0,0" Name="tbServingValue" Text="" VerticalAlignment="Top" Width="75" /> <TextBlock Height="42" HorizontalAlignment="Left" Margin="156,120,0,0" Name="tbUOM" Text="UOM:" VerticalAlignment="Top" Width="60" /> <Button Content="" HorizontalAlignment="Right" Height="63" Margin="0,100,13,0" VerticalAlignment="Top" Width="132" RenderTransformOrigin="0.455,0.286" Style="{StaticResource wp7_buttonAddNew}" x:Name="btnAddNewItem" Click="btnAddNewItem_Click"/> </Grid> Thanks!

  Read the article

• Looking for an email template engine for end-users ...

  - by RizwanK

  We have a number of customers that we have to send monthly invoices too. Right now, I'm managing a codebase that does SQL queries against our customer database and billing database and places that data into emails - and sends it. I grow weary of maintaining this every time we want to include a new promotion or change our customer service phone numbers. So, I'm looking for a replacement to move more of this into the hands of those requesting the changes. In my ideal world, I need : A WYSIWYG (man, does anyone even say that anymore?) email editor that generates templates based upon the output from a Database Query. The ability to drag and drop various fields from the database query into the email template. Display of sample email results with the database query. Web application, preferably not requiring IIS. Involve as little code as possible for the end-user, but allow basic functionality (i.e. arrays/for loops) Either comes with it's own email delivery engine, or writes output in a way that I can easily write a Python script to deliver the email. Support for generic Database Connectors. (I need MSSQL and MySQL) F/OSS So ... can anyone suggest a project like this, or some tools that'd be useful for rolling my own? (My current alternative idea is using something like ERB or Tenjin, having them write the code, but not having live-preview for the editor would suck...)

  Read the article

• Using abstract base to implement private parts of a template class?

  - by StackedCrooked

  When using templates to implement mix-ins (as an alternative to multiple inheritance) there is the problem that all code must be in the header file. I'm thinking of using an abstract base class to get around that problem. Here's a code sample: class Widget { public: virtual ~Widget() {} }; // Abstract base class allows to put code in .cpp file. class AbstractDrawable { public: virtual ~AbstractDrawable() = 0; virtual void draw(); virtual int getMinimumSize() const; }; // Drawable mix-in template<class T> class Drawable : public T, public AbstractDrawable { public: virtual ~Drawable() {} virtual void draw() { AbstractDrawable::draw(); } virtual int getMinimumSize() const { return AbstractDrawable::getMinimumSize(); } }; class Image : public Drawable< Widget > { }; int main() { Image i; i.draw(); return 0; } Has anyone walked that road before? Are there any pitfalls that I should be aware of?

  Read the article

• Java reflection Method invocations yield result faster than Fields?

  - by omerkudat

  I was microbenchmarking some code (please be nice) and came across this puzzle: when reading a field using reflection, invoking the getter Method is faster than reading the Field. Simple test class: private static final class Foo { public Foo(double val) { this.val = val; } public double getVal() { return val; } public final double val; // only public for demo purposes } We have two reflections: Method m = Foo.class.getDeclaredMethod("getVal", null); Field f = Foo.class.getDeclaredField("val"); Now I call the two reflections in a loop, invoke on the Method, and get on the Field. A first run is done to warm up the VM, a second run is done with 10M iterations. The Method invocation is consistently 30% faster, but why? Note that getDeclaredMethod and getDeclaredField are not called in the loop. They are called once and executed on the same object in the loop. I also tried some minor variations: made the field non-final, transitive, non-public, etc. All of these combinations resulted in statistically similar performance. Edit: This is on WinXP, Intel Core2 Duo, Sun JavaSE build 1.6.0_16-b01, running under jUnit4 and Eclipse.

  Read the article

• DB Design Pattern - Many to many classification / categorised tagging.

  - by Robin Day

  I have an existing database design that stores Job Vacancies. The "Vacancy" table has a number of fixed fields across all clients, such as "Title", "Description", "Salary range". There is an EAV design for "Custom" fields that the Clients can setup themselves, such as, "Manager Name", "Working Hours". The field names are stored in a "ClientText" table and the data stored in a "VacancyClientText" table with VacancyId, ClientTextId and Value. Lastly there is a many to many EAV design for custom tagging / categorising the vacancies with things such as Locations/Offices the vacancy is in, a list of skills required. This is stored as a "ClientCategory" table listing the types of tag, "Locations, Skills", a "ClientCategoryItem" table listing the valid values for each Category, e.g., "London,Paris,New York,Rome", "C#,VB,PHP,Python". Finally there is a "VacancyClientCategoryItem" table with VacancyId and ClientCategoryItemId for each of the selected items for the vacancy. There are no limits to the number of custom fields or custom categories that the client can add. I am now designing a new system that is very similar to the existing system, however, I have the ability to restrict the number of custom fields a Client can have and it's being built from scratch so I have no legacy issues to deal with. For the Custom Fields my solution is simple, I have 5 additional columns on the Vacancy Table called CustomField1-5. This removes one of the EAV designs. It is with the tagging / categorising design that I am struggling. If I limit a client to having 5 categories / types of tag. Should I create 5 tables listing the possible values "CustomCategoryItems1-5" and then an additional 5 many to many tables "VacancyCustomCategoryItem1-5" This would result in 10 tables performing the same storage as the three tables in the existing system. Also, should (heaven forbid) the requirements change in that I need 6 custom categories rather than 5 then this will result in a lot of code change. Therefore, can anyone suggest any DB Design Patterns that would be more suitable to storing such data. I'm happy to stick with the EAV approach, however, the existing system has come across all the usual performance issues and complex queries associated with such a design. Any advice / suggestions are much appreciated. The DBMS system used is SQL Server 2005, however, 2008 is an option if required for any particular pattern.

  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

• SimpleMembership, Membership Providers, Universal Providers and the new ASP.NET 4.5 Web Forms and ASP.NET MVC 4 templates

  - by Jon Galloway

  The ASP.NET MVC 4 Internet template adds some new, very useful features which are built on top of SimpleMembership. These changes add some great features, like a much simpler and extensible membership API and support for OAuth. However, the new account management features require SimpleMembership and won't work against existing ASP.NET Membership Providers. I'll start with a summary of top things you need to know, then dig into a lot more detail. Summary: SimpleMembership has been designed as a replacement for traditional the previous ASP.NET Role and Membership provider system SimpleMembership solves common problems people ran into with the Membership provider system and was designed for modern user / membership / storage needs SimpleMembership integrates with the previous membership system, but you can't use a MembershipProvider with SimpleMembership The new ASP.NET MVC 4 Internet application template AccountController requires SimpleMembership and is not compatible with previous MembershipProviders You can continue to use existing ASP.NET Role and Membership providers in ASP.NET 4.5 and ASP.NET MVC 4 - just not with the ASP.NET MVC 4 AccountController The existing ASP.NET Role and Membership provider system remains supported as is part of the ASP.NET core ASP.NET 4.5 Web Forms does not use SimpleMembership; it implements OAuth on top of ASP.NET Membership The ASP.NET Web Site Administration Tool (WSAT) is not compatible with SimpleMembership The following is the result of a few conversations with Erik Porter (PM for ASP.NET MVC) to make sure I had some the overall details straight, combined with a lot of time digging around in ILSpy and Visual Studio's assembly browsing tools. SimpleMembership: The future of membership for ASP.NET The ASP.NET Membership system was introduces with ASP.NET 2.0 back in 2005. It was designed to solve common site membership requirements at the time, which generally involved username / password based registration and profile storage in SQL Server. It was designed with a few extensibility mechanisms - notably a provider system (which allowed you override some specifics like backing storage) and the ability to store additional profile information (although the additional  profile information was packed into a single column which usually required access through the API). While it's sometimes frustrating to work with, it's held up for seven years - probably since it handles the main use case (username / password based membership in a SQL Server database) smoothly and can be adapted to most other needs (again, often frustrating, but it can work). The ASP.NET Web Pages and WebMatrix efforts allowed the team an opportunity to take a new look at a lot of things - e.g. the Razor syntax started with ASP.NET Web Pages, not ASP.NET MVC. The ASP.NET Web Pages team designed SimpleMembership to (wait for it) simplify the task of dealing with membership. As Matthew Osborn said in his post Using SimpleMembership With ASP.NET WebPages: With the introduction of ASP.NET WebPages and the WebMatrix stack our team has really be focusing on making things simpler for the developer. Based on a lot of customer feedback one of the areas that we wanted to improve was the built in security in ASP.NET. So with this release we took that time to create a new built in (and default for ASP.NET WebPages) security provider. I say provider because the new stuff is still built on the existing ASP.NET framework. So what do we call this new hotness that we have created? Well, none other than SimpleMembership. SimpleMembership is an umbrella term for both SimpleMembership and SimpleRoles. Part of simplifying membership involved fixing some common problems with ASP.NET Membership. Problems with ASP.NET Membership ASP.NET Membership was very obviously designed around a set of assumptions: Users and user information would most likely be stored in a full SQL Server database or in Active Directory User and profile information would be optimized around a set of common attributes (UserName, Password, IsApproved, CreationDate, Comment, Role membership...) and other user profile information would be accessed through a profile provider Some problems fall out of these assumptions. Requires Full SQL Server for default cases The default, and most fully featured providers ASP.NET Membership providers (SQL Membership Provider, SQL Role Provider, SQL Profile Provider) require full SQL Server. They depend on stored procedure support, and they rely on SQL Server cache dependencies, they depend on agents for clean up and maintenance. So the main SQL Server based providers don't work well on SQL Server CE, won't work out of the box on SQL Azure, etc. Note: Cory Fowler recently let me know about these Updated ASP.net scripts for use with Microsoft SQL Azure which do support membership, personalization, profile, and roles. But the fact that we need a support page with a set of separate SQL scripts underscores the underlying problem. Aha, you say! Jon's forgetting the Universal Providers, a.k.a. System.Web.Providers! Hold on a bit, we'll get to those... Custom Membership Providers have to work with a SQL-Server-centric API If you want to work with another database or other membership storage system, you need to to inherit from the provider base classes and override a bunch of methods which are tightly focused on storing a MembershipUser in a relational database. It can be done (and you can often find pretty good ones that have already been written), but it's a good amount of work and often leaves you with ugly code that has a bunch of System.NotImplementedException fun since there are a lot of methods that just don't apply. Designed around a specific view of users, roles and profiles The existing providers are focused on traditional membership - a user has a username and a password, some specific roles on the site (e.g. administrator, premium user), and may have some additional "nice to have" optional information that can be accessed via an API in your application. This doesn't fit well with some modern usage patterns: In OAuth and OpenID, the user doesn't have a password Often these kinds of scenarios map better to user claims or rights instead of monolithic user roles For many sites, profile or other non-traditional information is very important and needs to come from somewhere other than an API call that maps to a database blob What would work a lot better here is a system in which you were able to define your users, rights, and other attributes however you wanted and the membership system worked with your model - not the other way around. Requires specific schema, overflow in blob columns I've already mentioned this a few times, but it bears calling out separately - ASP.NET Membership focuses on SQL Server storage, and that storage is based on a very specific database schema. SimpleMembership as a better membership system As you might have guessed, SimpleMembership was designed to address the above problems. Works with your Schema As Matthew Osborn explains in his Using SimpleMembership With ASP.NET WebPages post, SimpleMembership is designed to integrate with your database schema: All SimpleMembership requires is that there are two columns on your users table so that we can hook up to it – an “ID” column and a “username” column. The important part here is that they can be named whatever you want. For instance username doesn't have to be an alias it could be an email column you just have to tell SimpleMembership to treat that as the “username” used to log in. Matthew's example shows using a very simple user table named Users (it could be named anything) with a UserID and Username column, then a bunch of other columns he wanted in his app. Then we point SimpleMemberhip at that table with a one-liner: WebSecurity.InitializeDatabaseFile("SecurityDemo.sdf", "Users", "UserID", "Username", true); No other tables are needed, the table can be named anything we want, and can have pretty much any schema we want as long as we've got an ID and something that we can map to a username. Broaden database support to the whole SQL Server family While SimpleMembership is not database agnostic, it works across the SQL Server family. It continues to support full SQL Server, but it also works with SQL Azure, SQL Server CE, SQL Server Express, and LocalDB. Everything's implemented as SQL calls rather than requiring stored procedures, views, agents, and change notifications. Note that SimpleMembership still requires some flavor of SQL Server - it won't work with MySQL, NoSQL databases, etc. You can take a look at the code in WebMatrix.WebData.dll using a tool like ILSpy if you'd like to see why - there places where SQL Server specific SQL statements are being executed, especially when creating and initializing tables. It seems like you might be able to work with another database if you created the tables separately, but I haven't tried it and it's not supported at this point. Note: I'm thinking it would be possible for SimpleMembership (or something compatible) to run Entity Framework so it would work with any database EF supports. That seems useful to me - thoughts? Note: SimpleMembership has the same database support - anything in the SQL Server family - that Universal Providers brings to the ASP.NET Membership system. Easy to with Entity Framework Code First The problem with with ASP.NET Membership's system for storing additional account information is that it's the gate keeper. That means you're stuck with its schema and accessing profile information through its API. SimpleMembership flips that around by allowing you to use any table as a user store. That means you're in control of the user profile information, and you can access it however you'd like - it's just data. Let's look at a practical based on the AccountModel.cs class in an ASP.NET MVC 4 Internet project. Here I'm adding a Birthday property to the UserProfile class. [Table("UserProfile")] public class UserProfile { [Key] [DatabaseGeneratedAttribute(DatabaseGeneratedOption.Identity)] public int UserId { get; set; } public string UserName { get; set; } public DateTime Birthday { get; set; } } Now if I want to access that information, I can just grab the account by username and read the value. var context = new UsersContext(); var username = User.Identity.Name; var user = context.UserProfiles.SingleOrDefault(u => u.UserName == username); var birthday = user.Birthday; So instead of thinking of SimpleMembership as a big membership API, think of it as something that handles membership based on your user database. In SimpleMembership, everything's keyed off a user row in a table you define rather than a bunch of entries in membership tables that were out of your control. How SimpleMembership integrates with ASP.NET Membership Okay, enough sales pitch (and hopefully background) on why things have changed. How does this affect you? Let's start with a diagram to show the relationship (note: I've simplified by removing a few classes to show the important relationships): So SimpleMembershipProvider is an implementaiton of an ExtendedMembershipProvider, which inherits from MembershipProvider and adds some other account / OAuth related things. Here's what ExtendedMembershipProvider adds to MembershipProvider: The important thing to take away here is that a SimpleMembershipProvider is a MembershipProvider, but a MembershipProvider is not a SimpleMembershipProvider. This distinction is important in practice: you cannot use an existing MembershipProvider (including the Universal Providers found in System.Web.Providers) with an API that requires a SimpleMembershipProvider, including any of the calls in WebMatrix.WebData.WebSecurity or Microsoft.Web.WebPages.OAuth.OAuthWebSecurity. However, that's as far as it goes. Membership Providers still work if you're accessing them through the standard Membership API, and all of the core stuff  - including the AuthorizeAttribute, role enforcement, etc. - will work just fine and without any change. Let's look at how that affects you in terms of the new templates. Membership in the ASP.NET MVC 4 project templates ASP.NET MVC 4 offers six Project Templates: Empty - Really empty, just the assemblies, folder structure and a tiny bit of basic configuration. Basic - Like Empty, but with a bit of UI preconfigured (css / images / bundling). Internet - This has both a Home and Account controller and associated views. The Account Controller supports registration and login via either local accounts and via OAuth / OpenID providers. Intranet - Like the Internet template, but it's preconfigured for Windows Authentication. Mobile - This is preconfigured using jQuery Mobile and is intended for mobile-only sites. Web API - This is preconfigured for a service backend built on ASP.NET Web API. Out of these templates, only one (the Internet template) uses SimpleMembership. ASP.NET MVC 4 Basic template The Basic template has configuration in place to use ASP.NET Membership with the Universal Providers. You can see that configuration in the ASP.NET MVC 4 Basic template's web.config: <profile defaultProvider="DefaultProfileProvider"> <providers> <add name="DefaultProfileProvider" type="System.Web.Providers.DefaultProfileProvider, System.Web.Providers, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" connectionStringName="DefaultConnection" applicationName="/" /> </providers> </profile> <membership defaultProvider="DefaultMembershipProvider"> <providers> <add name="DefaultMembershipProvider" type="System.Web.Providers.DefaultMembershipProvider, System.Web.Providers, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" connectionStringName="DefaultConnection" enablePasswordRetrieval="false" enablePasswordReset="true" requiresQuestionAndAnswer="false" requiresUniqueEmail="false" maxInvalidPasswordAttempts="5" minRequiredPasswordLength="6" minRequiredNonalphanumericCharacters="0" passwordAttemptWindow="10" applicationName="/" /> </providers> </membership> <roleManager defaultProvider="DefaultRoleProvider"> <providers> <add name="DefaultRoleProvider" type="System.Web.Providers.DefaultRoleProvider, System.Web.Providers, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" connectionStringName="DefaultConnection" applicationName="/" /> </providers> </roleManager> <sessionState mode="InProc" customProvider="DefaultSessionProvider"> <providers> <add name="DefaultSessionProvider" type="System.Web.Providers.DefaultSessionStateProvider, System.Web.Providers, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" connectionStringName="DefaultConnection" /> </providers> </sessionState> This means that it's business as usual for the Basic template as far as ASP.NET Membership works. ASP.NET MVC 4 Internet template The Internet template has a few things set up to bootstrap SimpleMembership: \Models\AccountModels.cs defines a basic user account and includes data annotations to define keys and such \Filters\InitializeSimpleMembershipAttribute.cs creates the membership database using the above model, then calls WebSecurity.InitializeDatabaseConnection which verifies that the underlying tables are in place and marks initialization as complete (for the application's lifetime) \Controllers\AccountController.cs makes heavy use of OAuthWebSecurity (for OAuth account registration / login / management) and WebSecurity. WebSecurity provides account management services for ASP.NET MVC (and Web Pages) WebSecurity can work with any ExtendedMembershipProvider. There's one in the box (SimpleMembershipProvider) but you can write your own. Since a standard MembershipProvider is not an ExtendedMembershipProvider, WebSecurity will throw exceptions if the default membership provider is a MembershipProvider rather than an ExtendedMembershipProvider. Practical example: Create a new ASP.NET MVC 4 application using the Internet application template Install the Microsoft ASP.NET Universal Providers for LocalDB NuGet package Run the application, click on Register, add a username and password, and click submit You'll get the following execption in AccountController.cs::Register: To call this method, the "Membership.Provider" property must be an instance of "ExtendedMembershipProvider". This occurs because the ASP.NET Universal Providers packages include a web.config transform that will update your web.config to add the Universal Provider configuration I showed in the Basic template example above. When WebSecurity tries to use the configured ASP.NET Membership Provider, it checks if it can be cast to an ExtendedMembershipProvider before doing anything else. So, what do you do? Options: If you want to use the new AccountController, you'll either need to use the SimpleMembershipProvider or another valid ExtendedMembershipProvider. This is pretty straightforward. If you want to use an existing ASP.NET Membership Provider in ASP.NET MVC 4, you can't use the new AccountController. You can do a few things: Replace  the AccountController.cs and AccountModels.cs in an ASP.NET MVC 4 Internet project with one from an ASP.NET MVC 3 application (you of course won't have OAuth support). Then, if you want, you can go through and remove other things that were built around SimpleMembership - the OAuth partial view, the NuGet packages (e.g. the DotNetOpenAuthAuth package, etc.) Use an ASP.NET MVC 4 Internet application template and add in a Universal Providers NuGet package. Then copy in the AccountController and AccountModel classes. Create an ASP.NET MVC 3 project and upgrade it to ASP.NET MVC 4 using the steps shown in the ASP.NET MVC 4 release notes. None of these are particularly elegant or simple. Maybe we (or just me?) can do something to make this simpler - perhaps a NuGet package. However, this should be an edge case - hopefully the cases where you'd need to create a new ASP.NET but use legacy ASP.NET Membership Providers should be pretty rare. Please let me (or, preferably the team) know if that's an incorrect assumption. Membership in the ASP.NET 4.5 project template ASP.NET 4.5 Web Forms took a different approach which builds off ASP.NET Membership. Instead of using the WebMatrix security assemblies, Web Forms uses Microsoft.AspNet.Membership.OpenAuth assembly. I'm no expert on this, but from a bit of time in ILSpy and Visual Studio's (very pretty) dependency graphs, this uses a Membership Adapter to save OAuth data into an EF managed database while still running on top of ASP.NET Membership. Note: There may be a way to use this in ASP.NET MVC 4, although it would probably take some plumbing work to hook it up. How does this fit in with Universal Providers (System.Web.Providers)? Just to summarize: Universal Providers are intended for cases where you have an existing ASP.NET Membership Provider and you want to use it with another SQL Server database backend (other than SQL Server). It doesn't require agents to handle expired session cleanup and other background tasks, it piggybacks these tasks on other calls. Universal Providers are not really, strictly speaking, universal - at least to my way of thinking. They only work with databases in the SQL Server family. Universal Providers do not work with Simple Membership. The Universal Providers packages include some web config transforms which you would normally want when you're using them. What about the Web Site Administration Tool? Visual Studio includes tooling to launch the Web Site Administration Tool (WSAT) to configure users and roles in your application. WSAT is built to work with ASP.NET Membership, and is not compatible with Simple Membership. There are two main options there: Use the WebSecurity and OAuthWebSecurity API to manage the users and roles Create a web admin using the above APIs Since SimpleMembership runs on top of your database, you can update your users as you would any other data - via EF or even in direct database edits (in development, of course)

  Read the article

• Tip/Trick: Fix Common SEO Problems Using the URL Rewrite Extension

  - by ScottGu

  Search engine optimization (SEO) is important for any publically facing web-site.  A large % of traffic to sites now comes directly from search engines, and improving your site’s search relevancy will lead to more users visiting your site from search engine queries.  This can directly or indirectly increase the money you make through your site. This blog post covers how you can use the free Microsoft URL Rewrite Extension to fix a bunch of common SEO problems that your site might have.  It takes less than 15 minutes (and no code changes) to apply 4 simple URL Rewrite rules to your site, and in doing so cause search engines to drive more visitors and traffic to your site.  The techniques below work equally well with both ASP.NET Web Forms and ASP.NET MVC based sites.  They also works with all versions of ASP.NET (and even work with non-ASP.NET content). [In addition to blogging, I am also now using Twitter for quick updates and to share links. Follow me at: twitter.com/scottgu] Measuring the SEO of your website with the Microsoft SEO Toolkit A few months ago I blogged about the free SEO Toolkit that we’ve shipped.  This useful tool enables you to automatically crawl/scan your site for SEO correctness, and it then flags any SEO issues it finds.  I highly recommend downloading and using the tool against any public site you work on.  It makes it easy to spot SEO issues you might have in your site, and pinpoint ways to optimize it further. Below is a simple example of a report I ran against one of my sites (www.scottgu.com) prior to applying the URL Rewrite rules I’ll cover later in this blog post:   Search Relevancy and URL Splitting Two of the important things that search engines evaluate when assessing your site’s “search relevancy” are: How many other sites link to your content.  Search engines assume that if a lot of people around the web are linking to your content, then it is likely useful and so weight it higher in relevancy. The uniqueness of the content it finds on your site.  If search engines find that the content is duplicated in multiple places around the Internet (or on multiple URLs on your site) then it is likely to drop the relevancy of the content. One of the things you want to be very careful to avoid when building public facing sites is to not allow different URLs to retrieve the same content within your site.  Doing so will hurt with both of the situations above.  In particular, allowing external sites to link to the same content with multiple URLs will cause your link-count and page-ranking to be split up across those different URLs (and so give you a smaller page rank than what it would otherwise be if it was just one URL).  Not allowing external sites to link to you in different ways sounds easy in theory – but you might wonder what exactly this means in practice and how you avoid it. 4 Really Common SEO Problems Your Sites Might Have Below are 4 really common scenarios that can cause your site to inadvertently expose multiple URLs for the same content.  When this happens external sites linking to yours will end up splitting their page links across multiple URLs - and as a result cause you to have a lower page ranking with search engines than you deserve. SEO Problem #1: Default Document IIS (and other web servers) supports the concept of a “default document”.  This allows you to avoid having to explicitly specify the page you want to serve at either the root of the web-site/application, or within a sub-directory.  This is convenient – but means that by default this content is available via two different publically exposed URLs (which is bad).  For example: http://scottgu.com/ http://scottgu.com/default.aspx SEO Problem #2: Different URL Casings Web developers often don’t realize URLs are case sensitive to search engines on the web.  This means that search engines will treat the following links as two completely different URLs: http://scottgu.com/Albums.aspx http://scottgu.com/albums.aspx SEO Problem #3: Trailing Slashes Consider the below two URLs – they might look the same at first, but they are subtly different. The trailing slash creates yet another situation that causes search engines to treat the URLs as different and so split search rankings: http://scottgu.com http://scottgu.com/ SEO Problem #4: Canonical Host Names Sometimes sites support scenarios where they support a web-site with both a leading “www” hostname prefix as well as just the hostname itself.  This causes search engines to treat the URLs as different and split search rankling: http://scottgu.com/albums.aspx/ http://www.scottgu.com/albums.aspx/ How to Easily Fix these SEO Problems in 10 minutes (or less) using IIS Rewrite If you haven’t been careful when coding your sites, chances are you are suffering from one (or more) of the above SEO problems.  Addressing these issues will improve your search engine relevancy ranking and drive more traffic to your site. The “good news” is that fixing the above 4 issues is really easy using the URL Rewrite Extension.  This is a completely free Microsoft extension available for IIS 7.x (on Windows Server 2008, Windows Server 2008 R2, Windows 7 and Windows Vista).  The great thing about using the IIS Rewrite extension is that it allows you to fix the above problems *without* having to change any code within your applications.  You can easily install the URL Rewrite Extension in under 3 minutes using the Microsoft Web Platform Installer (a free tool we ship that automates setting up web servers and development machines).  Just click the green “Install Now” button on the URL Rewrite Spotlight page to install it on your Windows Server 2008, Windows 7 or Windows Vista machine: Once installed you’ll find that a new “URL Rewrite” icon is available within the IIS 7 Admin Tool: Double-clicking the icon will open up the URL Rewrite admin panel – which will display the list of URL Rewrite rules configured for a particular application or site: Notice that our rewrite rule list above is currently empty (which is the default when you first install the extension).  We can click the “Add Rule…” link button in the top-right of the panel to add and enable new URL Rewriting logic for our site.  Scenario 1: Handling Default Document Scenarios One of the SEO problems I discussed earlier in this post was the scenario where the “default document” feature of IIS causes you to inadvertently expose two URLs for the same content on your site.  For example: http://scottgu.com/ http://scottgu.com/default.aspx We can fix this by adding a new IIS Rewrite rule that automatically redirects anyone who navigates to the second URL to instead go to the first one.  We will setup the HTTP redirect to be a “permanent redirect” – which will indicate to search engines that they should follow the redirect and use the new URL they are redirected to as the identifier of the content they retrieve.  Let’s look at how we can create such a rule.  We’ll begin by clicking the “Add Rule” link in the screenshot above.  This will cause the below dialog to display: We’ll select the “Blank Rule” template within the “Inbound rules” section to create a new custom URL Rewriting rule.  This will display an empty pane like below: Don’t worry – setting up the above rule is easy.  The following 4 steps explain how to do so: Step 1: Name the Rule Our first step will be to name the rule we are creating.  Naming it with a descriptive name will make it easier to find and understand later.  Let’s name this rule our “Default Document URL Rewrite” rule: Step 2: Setup the Regular Expression that Matches this Rule Our second step will be to specify a regular expression filter that will cause this rule to execute when an incoming URL matches the regex pattern.   Don’t worry if you aren’t good with regular expressions - I suck at them too. The trick is to know someone who is good at them or copy/paste them from a web-site.  Below we are going to specify the following regular expression as our pattern rule: (.*?)/?Default\.aspx$ This pattern will match any URL string that ends with Default.aspx. The "(.*?)" matches any preceding character zero or more times. The "/?" part says to match the slash symbol zero or one times. The "$" symbol at the end will ensure that the pattern will only match strings that end with Default.aspx.  Combining all these regex elements allows this rule to work not only for the root of your web site (e.g. http://scottgu.com/default.aspx) but also for any application or subdirectory within the site (e.g. http://scottgu.com/photos/default.aspx.  Because the “ignore case” checkbox is selected it will match both “Default.aspx” as well as “default.aspx” within the URL.   One nice feature built-into the rule editor is a “Test pattern” button that you can click to bring up a dialog that allows you to test out a few URLs with the rule you are configuring: Above I've added a “products/default.aspx” URL and clicked the “Test” button.  This will give me immediate feedback on whether the rule will execute for it.  Step 3: Setup a Permanent Redirect Action We’ll then setup an action to occur when our regular expression pattern matches the incoming URL: In the dialog above I’ve changed the “Action Type” drop down to be a “Redirect” action.  The “Redirect Type” will be a HTTP 301 Permanent redirect – which means search engines will follow it. I’ve also set the “Redirect URL” property to be: {R:1}/ This indicates that we want to redirect the web client requesting the original URL to a new URL that has the originally requested URL path - minus the "Default.aspx" in it.  For example, requests for http://scottgu.com/default.aspx will be redirected to http://scottgu.com/, and requests for http://scottgu.com/photos/default.aspx will be redirected to http://scottgu.com/photos/ The "{R:N}" regex construct, where N >= 0, is called a back-reference and N is the back-reference index. In the case of our pattern "(.*?)/?Default\.aspx$", if the input URL is "products/Default.aspx" then {R:0} will contain "products/Default.aspx" and {R:1} will contain "products".  We are going to use this {R:1}/ value to be the URL we redirect users to.  Step 4: Apply and Save the Rule Our final step is to click the “Apply” button in the top right hand of the IIS admin tool – which will cause the tool to persist the URL Rewrite rule into our application’s root web.config file (under a <system.webServer/rewrite> configuration section): <configuration>     <system.webServer>         <rewrite>             <rules>                 <rule name="Default Document" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="(.*?)/?Default\.aspx$" />                     <action type="Redirect" url="{R:1}/" />                 </rule>             </rules>         </rewrite>     </system.webServer> </configuration> Because IIS 7.x and ASP.NET share the same web.config files, you can actually just copy/paste the above code into your web.config files using Visual Studio and skip the need to run the admin tool entirely.  This also makes adding/deploying URL Rewrite rules with your ASP.NET applications really easy. Step 5: Try the Rule Out Now that we’ve saved the rule, let’s try it out on our site.  Try the following two URLs on my site: http://scottgu.com/ http://scottgu.com/default.aspx Notice that the second URL automatically redirects to the first one.  Because it is a permanent redirect, search engines will follow the URL and should update the page ranking of http://scottgu.com to include links to http://scottgu.com/default.aspx as well. Scenario 2: Different URL Casing Another common SEO problem I discussed earlier in this post is that URLs are case sensitive to search engines on the web.  This means that search engines will treat the following links as two completely different URLs: http://scottgu.com/Albums.aspx http://scottgu.com/albums.aspx We can fix this by adding a new IIS Rewrite rule that automatically redirects anyone who navigates to the first URL to instead go to the second (all lower-case) one.  Like before, we will setup the HTTP redirect to be a “permanent redirect” – which will indicate to search engines that they should follow the redirect and use the new URL they are redirected to as the identifier of the content they retrieve. To create such a rule we’ll click the “Add Rule” link in the URL Rewrite admin tool again.  This will cause the “Add Rule” dialog to appear again: Unlike the previous scenario (where we created a “Blank Rule”), with this scenario we can take advantage of a built-in “Enforce lowercase URLs” rule template.  When we click the “ok” button we’ll see the following dialog which asks us if we want to create a rule that enforces the use of lowercase letters in URLs: When we click the “Yes” button we’ll get a pre-written rule that automatically performs a permanent redirect if an incoming URL has upper-case characters in it – and automatically send users to a lower-case version of the URL: We can click the “Apply” button to use this rule “as-is” and have it apply to all incoming URLs to our site.  Because my www.scottgu.com site uses ASP.NET Web Forms, I’m going to make one small change to the rule we generated above – which is to add a condition that will ensure that URLs to ASP.NET’s built-in “WebResource.axd” handler are excluded from our case-sensitivity URL Rewrite logic.  URLs to the WebResource.axd handler will only come from server-controls emitted from my pages – and will never be linked to from external sites.  While my site will continue to function fine if we redirect these URLs to automatically be lower-case – doing so isn’t necessary and will add an extra HTTP redirect to many of my pages.  The good news is that adding a condition that prevents my URL Rewriting rule from happening with certain URLs is easy.  We simply need to expand the “Conditions” section of the form above We can then click the “Add” button to add a condition clause.  This will bring up the “Add Condition” dialog: Above I’ve entered {URL} as the Condition input – and said that this rule should only execute if the URL does not match a regex pattern which contains the string “WebResource.axd”.  This will ensure that WebResource.axd URLs to my site will be allowed to execute just fine without having the URL be re-written to be all lower-case. Note: If you have static resources (like references to .jpg, .css, and .js files) within your site that currently use upper-case characters you’ll probably want to add additional condition filter clauses so that URLs to them also don’t get redirected to be lower-case (just add rules for patterns like .jpg, .gif, .js, etc).  Your site will continue to work fine if these URLs get redirected to be lower case (meaning the site won’t break) – but it will cause an extra HTTP redirect to happen on your site for URLs that don’t need to be redirected for SEO reasons.  So setting up a condition clause makes sense to add. When I click the “ok” button above and apply our lower-case rewriting rule the admin tool will save the following additional rule to our web.config file: <configuration>     <system.webServer>         <rewrite>             <rules>                 <rule name="Default Document" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="(.*?)/?Default\.aspx$" />                     <action type="Redirect" url="{R:1}/" />                 </rule>                 <rule name="Lower Case URLs" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="[A-Z]" ignoreCase="false" />                     <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">                         <add input="{URL}" pattern="WebResource.axd" negate="true" />                     </conditions>                     <action type="Redirect" url="{ToLower:{URL}}" />                 </rule>             </rules>         </rewrite>     </system.webServer> </configuration> Try the Rule Out Now that we’ve saved the rule, let’s try it out on our site.  Try the following two URLs on my site: http://scottgu.com/Albums.aspx http://scottgu.com/albums.aspx Notice that the first URL (which has a capital “A”) automatically does a redirect to a lower-case version of the URL.  Scenario 3: Trailing Slashes Another common SEO problem I discussed earlier in this post is the scenario of trailing slashes within URLs.  The trailing slash creates yet another situation that causes search engines to treat the URLs as different and so split search rankings: http://scottgu.com http://scottgu.com/ We can fix this by adding a new IIS Rewrite rule that automatically redirects anyone who navigates to the first URL (that does not have a trailing slash) to instead go to the second one that does.  Like before, we will setup the HTTP redirect to be a “permanent redirect” – which will indicate to search engines that they should follow the redirect and use the new URL they are redirected to as the identifier of the content they retrieve.  To create such a rule we’ll click the “Add Rule” link in the URL Rewrite admin tool again.  This will cause the “Add Rule” dialog to appear again: The URL Rewrite admin tool has a built-in “Append or remove the trailing slash symbol” rule template.  When we select it and click the “ok” button we’ll see the following dialog which asks us if we want to create a rule that automatically redirects users to a URL with a trailing slash if one isn’t present: Like within our previous lower-casing rewrite rule we’ll add one additional condition clause that will exclude WebResource.axd URLs from being processed by this rule.  This will avoid an unnecessary redirect for happening for those URLs. When we click the “OK” button we’ll get a pre-written rule that automatically performs a permanent redirect if the URL doesn’t have a trailing slash – and if the URL is not processed by either a directory or a file.  This will save the following additional rule to our web.config file: <configuration>     <system.webServer>         <rewrite>             <rules>                 <rule name="Default Document" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="(.*?)/?Default\.aspx$" />                     <action type="Redirect" url="{R:1}/" />                 </rule>                 <rule name="Lower Case URLs" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="[A-Z]" ignoreCase="false" />                     <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">                         <add input="{URL}" pattern="WebResource.axd" negate="true" />                     </conditions>                     <action type="Redirect" url="{ToLower:{URL}}" />                 </rule>                 <rule name="Trailing Slash" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="(.*[^/])$" />                     <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">                         <add input="{REQUEST_FILENAME}" matchType="IsDirectory" negate="true" />                         <add input="{REQUEST_FILENAME}" matchType="IsFile" negate="true" />                         <add input="{URL}" pattern="WebResource.axd" negate="true" />                     </conditions>                     <action type="Redirect" url="{R:1}/" />                 </rule>             </rules>         </rewrite>     </system.webServer> </configuration> Try the Rule Out Now that we’ve saved the rule, let’s try it out on our site.  Try the following two URLs on my site: http://scottgu.com http://scottgu.com/ Notice that the first URL (which has no trailing slash) automatically does a redirect to a URL with the trailing slash.  Because it is a permanent redirect, search engines will follow the URL and update the page ranking. Scenario 4: Canonical Host Names The final SEO problem I discussed earlier are scenarios where a site works with both a leading “www” hostname prefix as well as just the hostname itself.  This causes search engines to treat the URLs as different and split search rankling: http://www.scottgu.com/albums.aspx http://scottgu.com/albums.aspx We can fix this by adding a new IIS Rewrite rule that automatically redirects anyone who navigates to the first URL (that has a www prefix) to instead go to the second URL.  Like before, we will setup the HTTP redirect to be a “permanent redirect” – which will indicate to search engines that they should follow the redirect and use the new URL they are redirected to as the identifier of the content they retrieve.  To create such a rule we’ll click the “Add Rule” link in the URL Rewrite admin tool again.  This will cause the “Add Rule” dialog to appear again: The URL Rewrite admin tool has a built-in “Canonical domain name” rule template.  When we select it and click the “ok” button we’ll see the following dialog which asks us if we want to create a redirect rule that automatically redirects users to a primary host name URL: Above I’m entering the primary URL address I want to expose to the web: scottgu.com.  When we click the “OK” button we’ll get a pre-written rule that automatically performs a permanent redirect if the URL has another leading domain name prefix.  This will save the following additional rule to our web.config file: <configuration>     <system.webServer>         <rewrite>             <rules>                 <rule name="Cannonical Hostname">                     <match url="(.*)" />                     <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">                         <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^scottgu\.com$" negate="true" />                     </conditions>                     <action type="Redirect" url="http://scottgu.com/{R:1}" />                 </rule>                 <rule name="Default Document" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="(.*?)/?Default\.aspx$" />                     <action type="Redirect" url="{R:1}/" />                 </rule>                 <rule name="Lower Case URLs" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="[A-Z]" ignoreCase="false" />                     <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">                         <add input="{URL}" pattern="WebResource.axd" negate="true" />                     </conditions>                     <action type="Redirect" url="{ToLower:{URL}}" />                 </rule>                 <rule name="Trailing Slash" stopProcessing="true">                     <match url="(.*[^/])$" />                     <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false">                         <add input="{REQUEST_FILENAME}" matchType="IsDirectory" negate="true" />                         <add input="{REQUEST_FILENAME}" matchType="IsFile" negate="true" />                         <add input="{URL}" pattern="WebResource.axd" negate="true" />                     </conditions>                     <action type="Redirect" url="{R:1}/" />                 </rule>             </rules>         </rewrite>     </system.webServer> </configuration> Try the Rule Out Now that we’ve saved the rule, let’s try it out on our site.  Try the following two URLs on my site: http://www.scottgu.com/albums.aspx http://scottgu.com/albums.aspx Notice that the first URL (which has the “www” prefix) now automatically does a redirect to the second URL which does not have the www prefix.  Because it is a permanent redirect, search engines will follow the URL and update the page ranking. 4 Simple Rules for Improved SEO The above 4 rules are pretty easy to setup and should take less than 15 minutes to configure on existing sites you already have.  The beauty of using a solution like the URL Rewrite Extension is that you can take advantage of it without having to change code within your web-site – and without having to break any existing links already pointing at your site.  Users who follow existing links will be automatically redirected to the new URLs you wish to publish.  And search engines will start to give your site a higher search relevancy ranking – which will list your site higher in search results and drive more traffic to it. Customizing your URL Rewriting rules further is easy to-do either by editing the web.config file directly, or alternatively, just double click the URL Rewrite icon within the IIS 7.x admin tool and it will list all the active rules for your web-site or application: Clicking any of the rules above will open the rules editor back up and allow you to tweak/customize/save them further. Summary Measuring and improving SEO is something every developer building a public-facing web-site needs to think about and focus on.  If you haven’t already, download and use the SEO Toolkit to analyze the SEO of your sites today. New URL Routing features in ASP.NET MVC and ASP.NET Web Forms 4 make it much easier to build applications that have more control over the URLs that are published.  Tools like the URL Rewrite Extension that I’ve talked about in this blog post make it much easier to improve the URLs that are published from sites you already have built today – without requiring you to change a lot of code. The URL Rewrite Extension provides a bunch of additional great capabilities – far beyond just SEO - as well.  I’ll be covering these additional capabilities more in future blog posts. Hope this helps, Scott

  Read the article

• Base64.encodeBase64URLSafeString() could not find method error in eclipse (Android project).

  - by jax

  I have an Android project that is using the Base64.encodeBase64URLSafeString commons method. The part that does the Base64 is in another java project. I have added the java project to the android project through the "Project" tab in the Build Path. I have already linked both projects to commons-codec thinking that this might be the problem but am still getting the following error in Eclipse. Both project have no errors. Could not find method org.apache.commons.codec.binary.Base64.encodeBase64URLSafeString, referenced from method com.mydomain.android.licensegenerator.client.LicenseLoader.doSha1AndBase64Encryption What might I be doing wrong?

  Read the article

• URL Rewrite – Multiple domains under one site. Part II

  - by OWScott

  I believe I have it … I’ve been meaning to put together the ultimate outgoing rule for hosting multiple domains under one site.  I finally sat down this week and setup a few test cases, and created one rule to rule them all.  In Part I of this two part series, I covered the incoming rule necessary to host a site in a subfolder of a website, while making it appear as if it’s in the root of the site.  Part II won’t work without applying Part I first, so if you haven’t read it, I encourage you to read it now. However, the incoming rule by itself doesn’t address everything.  Here’s the problem … Let’s say that we host www.site2.com in a subfolder called site2, off of masterdomain.com.  This is the same example I used in Part I.   Using an incoming rewrite rule, we are able to make a request to www.site2.com even though the site is really in the /site2 folder.  The gotcha comes with any type of path that ASP.NET generates (I’m sure other scripting technologies could do the same too).  ASP.NET thinks that the path to the root of the site is /site2, but the URL is /.  See the issue?  If ASP.NET generates a path or a redirect for us, it will always add /site2 to the URL.  That results in a path that looks something like www.site2.com/site2.  In Part I, I mentioned that you should add a condition where “{PATH_INFO} ‘does not match’ /site2”.  That allows www.site2.com/site2 and www.site2.com to both function the same.  This allows the site to always work, but if you want to hide /site2 in the URL, you need to take it one step further. One way to address this is in your code.  Ultimately this is the best bet.  Ruslan Yakushev has a great article on a few considerations that you can address in code.  I recommend giving that serious consideration.  Additionally, if you have upgraded to ASP.NET 3.5 SP1 or greater, it takes care of some of the references automatically for you. However, what if you inherit an existing application?  Or you can’t easily go through your existing site and make the code changes?  If this applies to you, read on. That’s where URL Rewrite 2.0 comes in.  With URL Rewrite 2.0, you can create an outgoing rule that will remove the /site2 before the page is sent back to the user.  This means that you can take an existing application, host it in a subfolder of your site, and ensure that the URL never reveals that it’s in a subfolder. Performance Considerations Performance overhead is something to be mindful of.  These outbound rules aren’t simply changing the server variables.  The first rule I’ll cover below needs to parse the HTML body and pull out the path (i.e. /site2) on the way through.  This will add overhead, possibly significant if you have large pages and a busy site.  In other words, your mileage may vary and you may need to test to see the impact that these rules have.  Don’t worry too much though.  For many sites, the performance impact is negligible. So, how do we do it? Creating the Outgoing Rule There are really two things to keep in mind.  First, ASP.NET applications frequently generate a URL that adds the /site2 back into the URL.  In addition to URLs, they can be in form elements, img elements and the like.  The goal is to find all of those situations and rewrite it on the way out.  Let’s call this the ‘URL problem’. Second, and similarly, ASP.NET can send a LOCATION redirect that causes a redirect back to another page.  Again, ASP.NET isn’t aware of the different URL and it will add the /site2 to the redirect.  Form Authentication is a good example on when this occurs.  Try to password protect a site running from a subfolder using forms auth and you’ll quickly find that the URL becomes www.site2.com/site2 again.  Let’s term this the ‘redirect problem’. Solving the URL Problem – Outgoing Rule #1 Let’s create a rule that removes the /site2 from any URL.  We want to remove it from relative URLs like /site2/something, or absolute URLs like http://www.site2.com/site2/something.  Most URLs that ASP.NET creates will be relative URLs, but I figure that there may be some applications that piece together a full URL, so we might as well expect that situation. Let’s get started.  First, create a new outbound rule.  You can create the rule within the /site2 folder which will reduce the performance impact of the rule.  Just a reminder that incoming rules for this situation won’t work in a subfolder … but outgoing rules will. Give it a name that makes sense to you, for example “Outgoing – URL paths”. Precondition.  If you place the rule in the subfolder, it will only run for that site and folder, so there isn’t need for a precondition.  Run it for all requests.  If you place it in the root of the site, you may want to create a precondition for HTTP_HOST = ^(www\.)?site2\.com$. For the Match section, there are a few things to consider.  For performance reasons, it’s best to match the least amount of elements that you need to accomplish the task.  For my test cases, I just needed to rewrite the <a /> tag, but you may need to rewrite any number of HTML elements.  Note that as long as you have the exclude /site2 rule in your incoming rule as I described in Part I, some elements that don’t show their URL—like your images—will work without removing the /site2 from them.  That reduces the processing needed for this rule. Leave the “matching scope” at “Response” and choose the elements that you want to change. Set the pattern to “^(?:site2|(.*//[_a-zA-Z0-9-\.]*)?/site2)(.*)”.  Make sure to replace ‘site2’ with your subfolder name in both places.  Yes, I realize this is a pretty messy looking rule, but it handles a few situations.  This rule will handle the following situations correctly: Original Rewritten using {R:1}{R:2} http://www.site2.com/site2/default.aspx http://www.site2.com/default.aspx http://www.site2.com/folder1/site2/default.aspx Won’t rewrite since it’s a sub-sub folder /site2/default.aspx /default.aspx site2/default.aspx /default.aspx /folder1/site2/default.aspx Won’t rewrite since it’s a sub-sub folder. For the conditions section, you can leave that be. Finally, for the rule, set the Action Type to “Rewrite” and set the Value to “{R:1}{R:2}”.  The {R:1} and {R:2} are back references to the sections within parentheses.  In other words, in http://domain.com/site2/something, {R:1} will be http://domain.com and {R:2} will be /something. If you view your rule from your web.config file (or applicationHost.config if it’s a global rule), it should look like this: <rule name="Outgoing - URL paths" enabled="true"> <match filterByTags="A" pattern="^(?:site2|(.*//[_a-zA-Z0-9-\.]*)?/site2)(.*)" /> <action type="Rewrite" value="{R:1}{R:2}" /> </rule> Solving the Redirect Problem Outgoing Rule #2 The second issue that we can run into is with a client-side redirect.  This is triggered by a LOCATION response header that is sent to the client.  Forms authentication is a common example.  To reproduce this, password protect your subfolder and watch how it redirects and adds the subfolder path back in. Notice in my test case the extra paths: http://site2.com/site2/login.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2fsite2%2fdefault.aspx I want to remove /site2 from both the URL and the ReturnUrl querystring value.  For semi-readability, let’s do this in 2 separate rules, one for the URL and one for the querystring. Create a second rule.  As with the previous rule, it can be created in the /site2 subfolder.  In the URL Rewrite wizard, select Outbound rules –> “Blank Rule”. Fill in the following information: Name response_location URL Precondition Don’t set Match: Matching Scope Server Variable Match: Variable Name RESPONSE_LOCATION Match: Pattern ^(?:site2|(.*//[_a-zA-Z0-9-\.]*)?/site2)(.*) Conditions Don’t set Action Type Rewrite Action Properties {R:1}{R:2} It should end up like so: <rule name="response_location URL"> <match serverVariable="RESPONSE_LOCATION" pattern="^(?:site2|(.*//[_a-zA-Z0-9-\.]*)?/site2)(.*)" /> <action type="Rewrite" value="{R:1}{R:2}" /> </rule> Outgoing Rule #3 Outgoing Rule #2 only takes care of the URL path, and not the querystring path.  Let’s create one final rule to take care of the path in the querystring to ensure that ReturnUrl=%2fsite2%2fdefault.aspx gets rewritten to ReturnUrl=%2fdefault.aspx. The %2f is the HTML encoding for forward slash (/). Create a rule like the previous one, but with the following settings: Name response_location querystring Precondition Don’t set Match: Matching Scope Server Variable Match: Variable Name RESPONSE_LOCATION Match: Pattern (.*)%2fsite2(.*) Conditions Don’t set Action Type Rewrite Action Properties {R:1}{R:2} The config should look like this: <rule name="response_location querystring"> <match serverVariable="RESPONSE_LOCATION" pattern="(.*)%2fsite2(.*)" /> <action type="Rewrite" value="{R:1}{R:2}" /> </rule> It’s possible to squeeze the last two rules into one, but it gets kind of confusing so I felt that it’s better to show it as two separate rules. Summary With the rules covered in these two parts, we’re able to have a site in a subfolder and make it appear as if it’s in the root of the site.  Not only that, we can overcome automatic redirecting that is caused by ASP.NET, other scripting technologies, and especially existing applications. Following is an example of the incoming and outgoing rules necessary for a site called www.site2.com hosted in a subfolder called /site2.  Remember that the outgoing rules can be placed in the /site2 folder instead of the in the root of the site. <rewrite> <rules> <rule name="site2.com in a subfolder" enabled="true" stopProcessing="true"> <match url=".*" /> <conditions logicalGrouping="MatchAll" trackAllCaptures="false"> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^(www\.)?site2\.com$" /> <add input="{PATH_INFO}" pattern="^/site2($|/)" negate="true" /> </conditions> <action type="Rewrite" url="/site2/{R:0}" /> </rule> </rules> <outboundRules> <rule name="Outgoing - URL paths" enabled="true"> <match filterByTags="A" pattern="^(?:site2|(.*//[_a-zA-Z0-9-\.]*)?/site2)(.*)" /> <action type="Rewrite" value="{R:1}{R:2}" /> </rule> <rule name="response_location URL"> <match serverVariable="RESPONSE_LOCATION" pattern="^(?:site2|(.*//[_a-zA-Z0-9-\.]*)?/site2)(.*)" /> <action type="Rewrite" value="{R:1}{R:2}" /> </rule> <rule name="response_location querystring"> <match serverVariable="RESPONSE_LOCATION" pattern="(.*)%2fsite2(.*)" /> <action type="Rewrite" value="{R:1}{R:2}" /> </rule> </outboundRules> </rewrite> If you run into any situations that aren’t caught by these rules, please let me know so I can update this to be as complete as possible. Happy URL Rewriting!

  Read the article

• Slides and Code from my Silverlight MVVM Talk at DevConnections

  - by dwahlin

  I had a great time at the DevConnections conference in Las Vegas this year where Visual Studio 2010 and Silverlight 4 were launched. While at the conference I had the opportunity to give a full-day Silverlight workshop as well as 4 different talks and met a lot of people developing applications in Silverlight. I also had a chance to appear on a live broadcast of Channel 9 with John Papa, Ward Bell and Shawn Wildermuth, record a video with Rick Strahl covering jQuery versus Silverlight and record a few podcasts on Silverlight and ASP.NET MVC 2.  It was a really busy 4 days but I had a lot of fun chatting with people and hearing about different business problems they were solving with ASP.NET and/or Silverlight. Thanks to everyone who attended my sessions and took the time to ask questions and stop by to talk one-on-one. One of the talks I gave covered the Model-View-ViewModel pattern and how it can be used to build architecturally sound applications. Topics covered in the talk included: Understanding the MVVM pattern Benefits of the MVVM pattern Creating a ViewModel class Implementing INotifyPropertyChanged in a ViewModelBase class Binding a ViewModel declaratively in XAML Binding a ViewModel with code ICommand and ButtonBase commanding support in Silverlight 4 Using InvokeCommandBehavior to handle additional commanding needs Working with ViewModels and Sample Data in Blend Messaging support with EventBus classes, EventAggregator and Messenger My personal take on code in a code-beside file (I’m all in favor of it when used appropriately for message boxes, child windows, animations, etc.) One of the samples I showed in the talk was intended to teach all of the concepts mentioned above while keeping things as simple as possible.  The sample demonstrates quite a few things you can do with Silverlight and the MVVM pattern so check it out and feel free to leave feedback about things you like, things you’d do differently or anything else. MVVM is simply a pattern, not a way of life so there are many different ways to implement it. If you’re new to the subject of MVVM check out the following resources. I wish this talk would’ve been recorded (especially since my live and canned demos all worked :-)) but these resources will help get you going quickly. Getting Started with the MVVM Pattern in Silverlight Applications Model-View-ViewModel (MVVM) Explained Laurent Bugnion’s Excellent Talk at MIX10     Download sample code and slides from my DevConnections talk     For more information about onsite, online and video training, mentoring and consulting solutions for .NET, SharePoint or Silverlight please visit http://www.thewahlingroup.com.

  Read the article

• Should I implement BackBone.js into my ASP.NET WebForms applications?

  - by Walter Stabosz

  Background I'm trying to improve my group's current web app development pattern. Our current pattern is something we came up with while trying to rich web apps on top of ASP.NET WebForms (none of us knew ASP.NET MVC). This is the current pattern: ! Our application is using the WinForms Framework. Our ASPX pages are essentially just HTML, we use almost no WebControls. We use JavaScript/jQuery to perform all of our UI events and AJAX calls. For a single ASPX page, we have a single .js file. All of our AJAX calls are POSTs (not RESTful at all) Our AJAX calls contact WebMethods which we have defined in a series of ASMX files. One ASMX file per business object. Why Change? I want to revise our pattern a bit for a couple of reasons: We're starting to find that our JavaScript files are getting a bit unwieldy. We're using a hodgepodge of methods for keeping our local data and DOM updates in sync. We seem to spend too much time writing code to keep things in sync, and it can get tricky to debug. I've been reading Developing Backbone.js Applications and I like a lot of what Backbone has to offer in terms of code organization and separation of concerns. However, I've gotten to the chapter on RESTful app, I started to feel some hesitation about using Backbone. The Problem The problem is our WebMethods do not really fit into the RESTful pattern, which seems to be the way Backbone wants to consume them. For now, I'd only like to address our issue of disorganized client side code. I'd like to avoid major rewrites to our WebMethods. My Questions Is it possible to use Backbone (or a similar library) to clean up our client code, while not majorly impacting our data access WebMethods? Or would trying to use Backbone in this manner be a bastardization of it's intended use? Anyone have any suggestions for improving our pattern in the area of code organization and spending less time writing DOM and data sync code?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237  | Next Page >